Impeachment of Witnesses Flashcards
(35 cards)
Impeachment Defined
Challenge to witness’s test. based on:
- Char. for truthfulness
- Bias
- Ability to perceive/testify accurately
- Contradictory prior statement OR
- Another Witness
Who may impeach a Witness?
Credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling him
How can a Witness’s Character for Truthfulness be attacked?
- By use of Reputation and opinion Testimony
- Specific Instances of Conduct
- Evidence of truthful char. of the wit. admiss. ONLY after char. for truthfulness has been attacked
Witness’s Character for Truthfulness - Reputation & Opinion Testimony
- Testimony must be about the witness’s reputation for having a character for untruthfulness, or
- In the form of an opinion of the witness’s char. for untruthfulness
Witness’s Character for Truthfulness - Truthful Character Evidence
- Credibility of Witness can’t be bolstered in advance of an attack
- Ev. of truthful char. of wit. admiss. only after his char. for truthfulness has been attacked
Witness’s Character for Truthfulness - Specific Instances of Conduct
Only on Cross-Examination
- Generally, not admiss. to attack or support the witness’s char. for truthfulness
- On cross, wit. may be asked about specific instances of conduct if its probative of the truthfulness or untruthfulness of
- The witness or
- Another witness about whose char. the wit. being crossed has testified
Specific Instances of Conduct - Limitations
- Probative value is subst. outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice (Fed. Rule 403)
- Protection of witness from harassment or undue embarassment (Fed. Rule 611)
- Lawyer who examines wit. must have good faith basis for believing that the misconduct occurred b/f asking wit. about it
Specific Instances of Conduct - Arrest
- Witness can’t be cross-examined about being arrested solely for purpose of impeaching the witness’s char. for truthfulness
- BUT can be cross-examined about the underlying conduct that lead to the arrest
Specific Instances of Conduct - Witness denies specific Act on Cross
- When on cross, witness denies specific act
- Extrinsic Evidence is NOT admiss. to prove specific act in order to attack or support witness’s char. for truthfulness
- Exception - Criminal Convictions
*
- Exception - Criminal Convictions
When is extrinsic evidence admissible
- Ext. Ev. of Specific Conduct is Always admissible to impeach a witness on other grounds
- Bias or prejudice
- Sensory defects
- Prior Inconsistent Statements
- Bad char. of witness
- NOT to prove the conduct in order to attack or support witness’s character for truthfulness
Sensory Competence
Can be impeached for deficiency in testimonial capactities:
- inability to observe,
- communicate, or
- remeber
By demonstrating that the wit. is phys. or mentally impaired or through ev. of outside interference w/ wit. abilities
- e.g. Thunder impeding ability to hear or darkness impeding ability to see
Bias or Prejudice Evidence
Can be used to impeach witness b/c relevant to credibility - Wit. may be influenced by:
- relationship to a party (Family, Employment)
- Interest in the outcome (Receipt of inheritence)
- Interest in Testifying (avoidance of prosecution)
Evidence of Prior Inconsistent Statements
Can be used to impeach if a witness’s prior statement is inconsistent w/ material part of the witness’s testimony
- Extrinsic Ev. of prior inconsitent statement admissible only if:
- Witness has chance to explain/deny statement and
- Opposing party can examine witness about it
Evidence of Prior Inconsistent statement - Exception to opportunity to explain requirement
Opportunity to explain/deny prior inconsist. st. doesn’t apply when the statement:
- Impeaches a hearsay declarant or
- Qualifies as an opposing party’s statement
What is a collateral Matter?
Evidence solely affecting the credibility of a witness
Evidence of Prior Inconsistent statement - Extrinsic Evidence - Collateral Matter
Ext. ev. of prior inconsistent statement can’t be used to impeach witness regarding a collateral matter
- Questioning party is bound by the witness’s answer
What are the limits to cross examining a witness about a collateral matter?
Whatever the question, the party is bound by the witness’ answer
- Extrinsic Ev. on a collateral matter is inadmiss. to impeach a witness
What does the credibility issues to the limits of collateral matters not apply to?
- Bias or Prejudice impeachment
- Sensory defects
- Character for untruthfulness
When can evidence of a criminal conviction be introduced for impeachment purposes?
In all casses, for all witnesses
- A witness’s char. for truthfulness may be impeached w/ ev. that the wit. has been convicted of a crime
- Subject to some limitations
What are the categories of admissible impeachment evidence of Criminal Conviction ?
- Convictions NOT involving dishonesty/False Statement - Punishable by death or imprisonment over 1 year and
- Crimes involving dishonesty or false statements
Criminal Convictions Evidence for impeachment - Crimes involving dishonesty or false statement
Any witness may be impeached w/ evidence that he has been convicted of:
- Any crime (felony or misdemeanor)
- Involving Dishonesty or False Statement
- Perjury
- Fraud
- embezzlement
- false pretense
- Forgery
- Larceny by Trick
- Tax evasion
- Subject to the 10 year restriction
- Regardless of punishment imposed or prejudicial effect of the evidence
Criminal Convictions Evidence for impeachment - Crimes not involving dishonesty/False Statement
Admissible to impeach witness only if:
- The crime is punishable by death or imprisonment for more than one year (usually a felony)
- Subject to 10 year limitation
Criminal Convictions Evidence for impeachment - Crimes not involving dishonesty/False Statement - Witness is a Criminal Defendant
When the witness is a criminal Defendant, evidence of felony conviction for a crime not involving dishonesty/False Statement admiss.
- ONLY if its probative value outweighs the prejudicial effect to the defendant
- Policy - Gives extra protection to crim. def. who takes the stand in his own case
When will evidence of a conviction for a witness othere than the criminal defendant be excluded?
If the probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice (balancing test)