🔍
Federal Evidence • Witness Impeachment
EVID#093
Legal Definition
A witness may be impeached by felony convictions involving moral turpitude only in criminal cases, subject to a CEC 352 balancing (on the record, for the defendant). However, in civil cases, a witness may be impeached by any felony conviction.
Plain English Explanation
In federal court, if a witness testifying has been convicted of a felony, that information can be used to question their honesty in court. Specifically, if their felony involved lying or dishonesty, the court must allow this evidence, unless the crime is over 10 years old. For other felonies, the court decides using a rule (Rule 403) to see if the felony's relevance is more significant than any unfair ideas it might cause.
In California criminal cases, it's a bit different. Here, only felonies that show bad moral character, like theft or fraud, can be used to question a witness's truthfulness. The court carefully balances using a specific California rule (CEC 352) to make sure the evidence doesn't unfairly affect the case. This is especially important if the person on trial is the one whose past is being examined.
In California civil cases, the rule is broader. Any felony, regardless of its nature, can be used to challenge a witness's credibility. The court still uses the CEC 352 rule to ensure the evidence is more helpful than harmful.
In California criminal cases, it's a bit different. Here, only felonies that show bad moral character, like theft or fraud, can be used to question a witness's truthfulness. The court carefully balances using a specific California rule (CEC 352) to make sure the evidence doesn't unfairly affect the case. This is especially important if the person on trial is the one whose past is being examined.
In California civil cases, the rule is broader. Any felony, regardless of its nature, can be used to challenge a witness's credibility. The court still uses the CEC 352 rule to ensure the evidence is more helpful than harmful.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: Bob is a witness in a civil lawsuit between Sam and a third party. Bob has a past felony conviction for a serious crime. The attorney for the third party mentions Bob's past felony in court. Result: The court allows this information to be used against Bob, even though it's a civil case, because any felony can be brought up to question a witness's credibility in civil cases in California.
Hypo 2: In a criminal case where Bob is a witness, the defense tries to bring up a minor crime Bob committed, which doesn't involve moral turpitude. Result: The court does not allow this information because the crime does not involve moral turpitude and is not relevant to Bob's honesty or reliability as a witness in the criminal case.
Hypo 2: In a criminal case where Bob is a witness, the defense tries to bring up a minor crime Bob committed, which doesn't involve moral turpitude. Result: The court does not allow this information because the crime does not involve moral turpitude and is not relevant to Bob's honesty or reliability as a witness in the criminal case.
Related Concepts
When attempting to impeach a witness, how do courts handle the admissibility of evidence related to felony convictions?
When attempting to impeach a witness, how do courts handle the admissibility of evidence related to prior inconsistent statements?
When attempting to impeach a witness, how do courts handle the admissibility of evidence related to specific instances of conduct and prior bad acts?
When attempting to impeach a witness in California, how do courts handle the admissibility of evidence related to misdemeanor convictions?
When attempting to impeach a witness in California, how do courts handle the admissibility of evidence related to prior inconsistent statements?
When attempting to impeach a witness in California, how do courts handle the admissibility of evidence related to specific instances of conduct and prior bad acts?
When attempting to impeach a witness in California, how do courts handle the admissibility of evidence under Proposition 8?
