L. Rush

To show good cause under Interim Rule 14(C) for remote testimony in a criminal trial, the State must present case-specific evidence that allowing a particular witness to testify remotely is necessary to prevent a concrete and substantial harm that would otherwise likely occur and that could not be adequately addressed if the witness were to testify in person.

When a defendant signs a plea agreement that leaves sentencing discretion to the trial court and contains a waiver of the right to appeal the sentence, the court should:
1. Explain that the defendant would ordinarily have the right to appeal their sentence, but the plea agreement contains a waiver limiting that right.
2. Read the appeal-waiver provision to the defendant.
3. Explain that the provision waives the defendant’s right to appeal the sentence to be imposed, except for:
• any issue that falls outside the scope of the waiver;
• a sentence that violates the plea agreement; or
• a sentence that is illegal because it falls outside the prescribed statutory range or is unconstitutional.
4. Confirm the defendant understands the consequences of the appeal-waiver provision before accepting the guilty plea.

A defendant must have the opportunity to personally question a witness to probe their recollection, test their reliability, expose their bias, and draw out favorable facts through cross-examination. When a trial court denies a defendant this constitutional right, the error requires reversal unless the State proves it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. To determine whether the State met its burden, reviewing courts consider several factors: the significance of the improperly admitted evidence to the State’s case; whether that evidence was merely cumulative; whether it was corroborated or contradicted by other evidence; and the extent of cross-examination or questioning on the improperly admitted evidence.