State v. Lewis, 365 N.C. 488

Defendant Paul Lewis was retried in Avery County after initial convictions for first-degree sex offense, burglary, and robbery were affirmed.
The retrial court limited cross-examination of lead investigator Detective Roberts about bias and alleged misconduct from the first trial.
MAR proceedings in 2006 found prejudicial misconduct by the investigator toward the defendant, leading to a new trial in the Court of Appeals Lewis II.
At retrial, the State sought to suppress evidence of Roberts' misconduct as irrelevant; the court granted the motion in limine.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals held the retrial court abused its discretion by excluding bias evidence, and the NC Supreme Court granted discretionary review.
The NC Supreme Court ultimately holds the defendant is entitled to a new trial due to the improper limitation on cross-examination and related prejudicial impact.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether cross-examination on bias was improperly barred	Lewis argued bias evidence was relevant to credibility under Rule 608(b)	Lewis asserted cross-exam could reveal bias and prejudice against him	Yes, the retrial court erred by excluding bias evidence
Prejudice from exclusion of bias evidence	Prejudice established given Roberts' central role	Cross-exam would have likely altered the verdict	Prejudice shown; new trial required
Effect of evidence about Tsilianos on retrial	Identification of co-defendant Tsilianos relevant to credibility	Evidence about Tsilianos could impeach victim's ID	Permitted cross-examination on procedures used to identify Tsilianos; further ruling required at remand
Destruction of the knife as exculpatory evidence	Destruction violated due process when evidence bore on defense	Destruction prevented defense from comparing knives	No due process violation; absence of bad faith and alternative impeachment evidence sufficed
Law of the case and suppression of identifications	Law of the case bound retrial court; prior denial of suppression was correct	New evidence required reconsideration of suppression	Law of the case not controlling; retrial court to assess suppression anew at third trial

State v. Hart, 239 N.C. 709 (1954) (witness credibility; cross-examination for bias allowed)
State v. Sam, 53 N.C. 115 (1860) (bias and credibility via cross-examination)
State v. Bell, 338 N.C. 363 (1994) (Rule 608(b) consent to impeach untruthfulness; conduct as credibility)
State v. Morgan, 315 N.C. 626 (1986) (specific misconduct may be probative of truthfulness)
State v. Wilson, 314 N.C. 653 (1985) (guard against juror tampering; cross-examination rights)
State v. Campbell, 296 N.C. 394 (1979) (avoid reference to co-defendant disposition; separate issue)
California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479 (1984) (due process and preservation of potentially exculpatory evidence)
Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51 (1988) (constitutional materiality for destroyed evidence; bad faith standard)
State v. Robinson, 346 N.C. 586 (1997) (evidence preservation; exculpatory value)