http://trial-coach.com/cross-examination/impeachment/ WitrynaOn cross-examination, the plaintiff, in good faith, asked the defendant about an instance in which the defendant had been fined by the city for failure to post warning signs at another construction site. The defendant objected to the plaintiff's question. Is the plaintiff's question permissible?

A-28-21 - State v. Andre Higgs (085863) (Essex County & Statewide)

WitrynaCourts have not relied on the term “on cross-examination” to limit impeachment that would otherwise be permissible under Rules 607 and 608. The Committee therefore … Witryna7 cze 2024 · Rule 608 (b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence provides one of the most useful and powerful impeachment tools available to lawyers during cross … bury interchange

Trial Evidence Series, Part 9: Impeachment - Alameda County

Witryna5 lut 2024 · He asked that Trump provide testimony about his conduct ''either before or during the Senate impeachment trial,'' and under cross-examination, as early as Monday, Feb. 8, and not later than ... Witryna4 gru 2015 · In the heat of battle and the aggression of cross-examination, a prosecutor may choose not merely to highlight the difference between the defendant’s version and that of police or lay witnesses but to push further and ask “so, your position is that they all lied?” The problem here is simple. Witrynathen sought to bar defendant from cross-examining Officer Lee about any prior shootings and the trial court granted the State’s motion. Lastly, the State sought to impeach defendant on cross-examination with his five prior judgments of conviction; four were over 20 years old at the time of trial and one was over 14 years old. hamster ninja warrior