Witness-Impeachment Flashcards
When can a witnesses prior convictions be used to impeach for truthfulness?
Generally, a witness may be impeached, in both civil and criminal cases, by a conviction for a crime that requires as an element of the crime proof or admission of an act of dishonesty or false statement, such as perjury, without weighing the probative value of the conviction against its prejudicial effect, if the conviction is no more than 10 years old. In measuring the 10-year period, the later of the date of conviction or release from imprisonment is used.
Can extrinsic evidence be introduced to impeach a witness on a prior inconsistent statement?
A witness’s prior statement that is inconsistent with a material part of the witness’s testimony may be used to impeach the witness. However, extrinsic evidence of a witness’s prior inconsistent statement may be introduced only if the witness is given the opportunity to explain or deny the statement and the opposing party is given the opportunity to examine the witness about it.
Who has the burden of showing 403 when a defendant’s past convictions (under 10 years) is being introduced in a civil case?
The defendant must show that the probative value of the conviction is substantially outweighed by the prejudicial effect in order to prevail.
For a witness other than a criminal defendant, the court may exclude such evidence when the party objecting to the impeachment shows that the probative value is substantially outweighed by the prejudicial effect
Can the defense impeach a declarants testimony by showing the declarant had an interest in the outcome of the trial?
When a hearsay statement is admitted into evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked by any evidence that would be admissible if the declarant had testified as a witness. For example, if the declarant co-conspirator had testified, the defendant’s attorney would have been able to cross-examine him as to his bias against the defendant. Because a witness may be influenced by his relationship with a party or in the outcome of a case, evidence of the witness’s bias is always material. The co-conspirator may have had an incentive to testify against the defendant in exchange for a better deal from the prosecutor. This is relevant and an appropriate way to impeach the witness.
