CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Hearsay Exceptions re Statements
......Prior Inconsistent Statements
.........Test for Inconsistency
............Inconsistency In Effect
5 Cards On This Topic:

W's prior statement to O was inconsistent with prior testimony and admissible under EC 1235 where it was inconsistent in effect rather than an express contradiction of terms.

W's statements to officers at scene properly introduced by DA as inconsistent statements at trial; statements were inconsistent in effect.

Record supported trial court's implied finding that witness's claimed memory loss was deliberate evasion; testimony properly impeached with prior recorded testimony.

Inconsistency of statement to be determined, not by individual words alone, but by whole impression or effect of what has been said or done.

For impeachment, inconsistency in effect, rather than contradiction in express terms, is test for admitting witness' prior inconsistent statement.