VIEW TREE
ICON KEY
3888:false:false:false:false:false:false:true:false:false:!:false:-1:-1
Phases of witness interrogation after cross-examination
Add Comment
Contributed in 2009 & last edited in 2009 by Peter Tillers
Browse from Cross-examination comes second
Law
»
Courts
»
Evidence
»
The nature of proof
»
Proof as temporal process
»
Proof at trial has a temporal dimension
»
Proof procedure at trial
»
General structure
»
Witness interrogation
»
Phases of interrogation
»
Subsequent phases: Phases of witness interrogation...
Narrow Down
Contribution Suggestions
vouch for authority for rule...
It is uncertain whether a trial court may bar a person from serving as a witness because of a mental disorder or defect.United States v. Peyro, 768 F.2d 826, 830-831 (8th Cir. 1986) ("Debra Anton, Musick's girlfriend at the time he distributed cocaine for Lorente in California, served as a government witness, and testified regarding the relationship between Musick and Lorente. In the course of her testimony, Anton...
in support of
It is uncertain whether a trial court may bar a person from serving as a witness because of a mental disorder or defect.vouch for authority for rule...
To qualify as a statement of present sense impression for purposes of the hearsay exception by that name, the statement made by the declarant (the...United States v. Delaplane, 778 F.2d 570, 574 (10th Cir. 1985) (upholding trial court's ruling which allowed the introduction of a wiretapped telephone conversation [between an unidentified male and an unidentified female....
in support of
To qualify as a statement of present sense impression for purposes of the hearsay exception by that name, the statement made by the declarant (the maker of the statement) must describe or explain an event or condition.vouch for authority for rule...
If a conviction for a crime other than one involving dishonesty or false statement is offered to impeach a criminal defendant, the conviction is...Fed. R. Evid. 609(a)(1) ("(a) General rule. For the purpose of attacking the character for truthfulness of a witness,
(1) ... evidence that an accused has been convicted of such a....
in support of
If a conviction for a crime other than one involving dishonesty or false statement is offered to impeach a criminal defendant, the conviction is admissible only if the proponent shows that the probative value of the criminal conviction on the issue of the truthfulness of the witness -- the criminal defendant -- outweighs the risk of prejudice to the criminal defendant.