Did the court of appeals properly affirm the trial court's prohibition of the defense from adducing evidence of prosecution witnesses' criminal histories?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW . This case presents two issues. First, did the court of appeals properly affirm the trial court and hold that it did not err in prohibiting the defense from adducing evidence that two prosecution witnesses were criminals, oe with extensive past and current misbehavior, when Ms. Shufford had no criminal history of any kind? Second, were Counts 2 & 13 in the indictment fatally defective by alleging dates of the supposed conspiracy which were not times that any criminal behavior occurred? This Court's resolution of these issues would provide muchneeded guidance on how to determine these issues. i LIST. OF PARTIES Petitioner, Janice Shufford, was the defendant in the district court and the appellant irl the court of appeals. Respondent, the United States of America, was the plaintiff in the district court and the appellee in the court of appeals. | ° CORPORATE DISCLOSURE Not applicable. ; ; RELATED CASES None. . ii