chap. 8: impeachment

CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT

P. JANICKE

2014

2014 Chap. 8 -- Impeachment 2

DEFINITION AND METHODS

• IMPEACHMENT IS THE PROCESS OF ATTEMPTING TO WEAKEN THE PERCEIVED CREDIBILITY OF A WITNESS

• MOST COMMONLY DONE ON CROSS

• AT LEAST SIX METHODS OF IMPEACHMENT, EACH WITH ITS OWN RULES LIMITING REACH


MEANING OF “EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE”

• DOING THE IMPEACHMENT BY

– CALLING A WITNESS TO IMPEACH THE TARGET WITNESS, OR

– INTRODUCING A DOCUMENT TO DO SO


THE GENERAL MODES

• 3 FORMS OF ATTACK ON THE WITNESS’S BELIEVABILITY DUE TO SOME GENERAL WEAKNESS AS A WITNESS

• WEAKNESS NOT LIMITED TO THIS PARTICULAR CASE


THE 3 GENERAL ATTACKS

1. PROVE IMPAIRED GENERAL COMPETENCY

– UNABLE TO OBSERVE OR REMEMBER THINGS IN GENERAL, NOT LIMITED TO THIS CASE

– EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED


2. POOR CHARACTER FOR VERACITY

a. BAD REPUTATION FOR TRUTHFULNESS – EXTRINSIC WITNESS TESTIMONY IS ALLOWED, BUT NO SPECIFICS

b. PRIOR DISHONEST NON-CONVICTION ACTS, ESTABLISHED ON CROSS. (HENCE EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE IS NOT ALLOWED)

• TEXAS: DOES NOT ALLOW IMPEACHMENT BY DISHONEST NON-CONVICTION ACTS, EVEN ON CROSS-EXAM



3. CONVICTION OF A CRIME

– ANY CRIME INVOLVING DISHONESTY • NO WEIGHING PROBATIVE VALUE OR

PREJUDICE REQUIRED

– ANY FELONY, BUT SUBJECT TO WEIGHING PROBATIVENESS AGAINST RISK OF PREJUDICE

– TEN-YEAR LIMIT IN EITHER CASE


– IF THE WITNESS ADMITS THE CONVICTION, CANNOT USE EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE CONVICTION

– IF THE WITNESS DOES NOT ADMIT, CAN USE RECORD ONLY (NO ADD’L WITNESS) –

• CRIME; DATE OF CONVICTION; SENTENCE. NO DETAILS


SPECIFIC MODES

• 3 FORMS OF ATTACK ON THE WITNESS’S CREDIBILITY IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE

• IN GENERAL THE WITNESS MIGHT HAVE GOOD VERACITY, BUT NOT HERE


MODES OF SPECIFIC IMPEACHMENT

4. PROVE IMPAIRED SPECIFIC COMPETENCY, i.e., ON THE OCCASION IN QUESTION

EXAMPLES:– DRUNK– NIGHT-TIME– LOOKING THE OTHER WAY

• EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED


5. BIAS OR PREJUDICE

EXAMPLES:– FRIEND OR RELATIVE OF A PARTY– ANIMOSITY– BUSINESS OBJECTIVE IF ONE SIDE

WINS– SIMILARLY SITUATED NEIGHBORS

• EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED


6. PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENT OF A WITNESS

– MUST AFFORD TARGET WIT. A CHANCE DURING TRIAL TO EXPLAIN THE INCONSISTENCY

• THEREFORE, CAN’T USE THIS MODE IF WITNESS HAS BEEN EXCUSED AND IS BEYOND SUBPOENA REACH

>>

• IF WITNESS UNEQUIVOCALLY ADMITS THE PRIOR STATEMENT, NO EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE ALLOWED

• IF DENIED, EXTRINSIC WITNESSES OR DOCUMENTS ARE ALLOWED


PROBLEMS/CASES

• Abel

• 8A

• Lipscomb

• 8E



WHO CAN BE IMPEACHED ?

• ANY WITNESS WHO ANSWERS ANY QUESTION PLACES HIS CREDIBILITY IN ISSUE, AND CAN BE IMPEACHED

• ON CROSS, THE FEDERAL SCOPE-OF-THE-DIRECT RULE DOES NOT BLOCK IMPEACHMENT [NOTE R. 611(b)’s SPECIFIC EXCEPTION FOR CREDIBILITY QUESTIONS]

• CAN IMPEACH YOUR OWN WITNESS


• CAN IMPEACH AN IMPEACHING WITNESS

• A NON-TESTIFYING PARTY GENERALLY CANNOT BE IMPEACHED– BUT A HEARSAY DECLARANT CAN BE

IMPEACHED


SERIATIM IMPEACHMENT METHODS

• ARE GENERALLY ALLOWED, SUBJECT TO DISCRETION ON WASTE OF TIME

• MOST COMMONLY DONE WHEN FIRST METHOD FAILS

>>


EXAMPLE #1 :• D. TESTIFIES

– ON CROSS, PROSECUTOR TRIES TO SHOW PRIOR DISHONEST ACTS – FALSE INCOME TAX RETURN

– D. DENIES FILING FALSE RETURN

• PROSECUTOR CAN NOW SWITCH TO CONVICTION-OF-A-CRIME-MODE (CONVICTION FOR FILING FALSE RETURN)


EXAMPLE #2

• IMPEACH A WITNESS FIRST WITH PRIOR DISHONEST ACTS (CROSS)

• THEN WITH FELONY CONVICTIONS

• THEN WITH PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS


SOME SURPRISING THINGS

• NON-MIRANDIZED STATEMENT CAN BE USED TO IMPEACH A TESTIFYING DEFENDANT

• PRE-MIRANDA-WARNING SILENCE CAN BE USED TO IMPEACH A TESTIFYING D.


• ILLEGALLY SEIZED ITEMS CAN BE USED TO IMPEACH A TESTIFYING DEFENDANT

– E.G.: ILLEGALLY SEIZED SHIRT WITH NIFTY CUT-OUTS

– E.G.: ILLEGALLY SEIZED COCAINE

• THESE TOOLS ARE SAID TO BE NECESSARY TO PROTECT INTEGRITY OF TRIAL SYSTEM

PROBLEMS/CASES

• Webster

• Harris

• Jenkins

• Havens

• 8G


chap. 8: impeachment

Documents