CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Method of Exam: Cross-Exam
......Scope of Examination
.........Testifying Criminal Defendant
11 Cards On This Topic:

As DA’s cross-exam. question as to why D was “laughing and carrying on” outside jury’s presence was posed in good faith and DA was exploring D’s testimony on direct about remorse for having killed V, DA did not commit misconduct.

D's claims that DA improperly cross-examined him on tattoos, Satanism, Ku Klux Klan, and statements to POs in letters were forfeited as he didn't object that DA had no good faith belief in facts underlying the questions.

In questioning D on cross-exam about differences between his account of a 1991 bicycle theft and that testified to by arresting O, DA's asking him if O had lied during his testimony was not misconduct.

No DA misconduct in cross-examining D re premeditation where nothing in 1st degree felony murder plea agreement restricted DA's ability to present evidence of crime's circumstances, including evidence of premeditation.

No error in allowing DA's cross-exam of D re two rapes that postdated charged crimes where cross-exam relevant to motivation to confess and credibility.

Once D takes stand and testifies to circumstances of charged offenses, DA on cross-examination is permitted to explore identical subject matter in much greater detail.

Trial court not required to make ruling limiting scope of cross-examination of D until after he testifies.

D cannot limit cross-exam to precise facts about which he testifies.

DA's "were they lying" questions were improper because they sought D's inadmissible lay opinion about police officers' veracity, invaded province of jury to determine credibility question, and were irrelevant to any issue in case.

When D takes stand and generally denies crime charged, permissible scope of cross-examination is very wide.

Rules summarizing permissible scope of cross-exam of testifying D in criminal case.