Whether Long Pumpkiw's right to confrontation was denied when the district court ruled that he could not cross-examine two important eye-witnesses "in any way" regarding their drug usage before, during, or after the car-jacking they allegedly observed, including their drug use on the day they showed up to testify?

These two witnesses had extensive drug histories, were using drugs during the alleged crime, used drugs regularly between the charged incident and trial, and used methamphetamine the day before the trial. Over Long Pumpkin's objection, the district court held that he could not question either witness "in any way" regarding their drug usage because this was a collateral, credibility matter.

In a split decision, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's determination. Both the majority and minority opinions cited to conflicting language and decisions from this Court and in various federal appellate decisions on the issue. Also in a split decision, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Long Pumpkin's Petition for Rehearing and Petition for Rehearing En Banc.

Whether Long Pumpkiw's right to confrontation was denied