CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Method of Exam: Cross-Exam
......Testing Credibility of Witness
.........Case Applications: Criminal
............Credibility Attack Permitted
11 Cards On This Topic:

Right of confrontation paramount over policy of protecting juvenile offender; includes right of cross-exam.

When prosecution's case turns on credibility of a witness, D must be given maximum opportunity to cross-examine and test credibility.

D's past physical abuse of infant niece probative of his credibility as self-described non-violent disciplinarian, involved possible acts of violent physical discipline or abuse to a child and were properly admitted under EC 352.

No absolute bar to DA’s use of testimony from previous trial at which D received ineffective assistance of counsel. to impeach witnesses at retrial.

Contradictory testimony doesn’t show incapacity to understand duty of truth, or to express self coherently; if D contended testimony incompetent because W was lying, this was credibility issue for jury and not relevant to competency.

DA’s line of questioning re statement rape V made to witness was relevant to witness’ credibility and D’s objections properly overruled.

DA's attempted impeachment of defense investigator re improper conduct suspension when he was a policeman was not misconduct as there was some good faith basis for questions.

Trial court may impose reasonable limits on defense's cross-examining expert witness based on newspaper articles re nature of charges pending against him.

Medical expert properly impeached in denying use of public resources for private work in case; tended to show abuse of public trust to advance own endeavors, and dishonesty.

D's counsel entitled to latitude while exploring bias in DA's witnesses.

Cases discussing various aspects of attacking credibility of witnesses.