Homework # 2 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Homework 2 - Essay ExampleThere are several shipway in which to impeach a witness at trial. Here, because the proceedings are criminal in nature, we would be dealing with the federal rules of evidence and also the federal rules of criminal procedure. Impeachment tools such as opinion, reputation and circumstantial Instances (Fed. Ru. Evid. 608), is based upon opinion or reputation testimony.This type of evidence is only admissible after the use of the witness is attacked by evidence of any form. Here for example, since Ralph noted on his application that he neer had an accident, his driving record could be introduced as evidence to impeach his testimony, the testimony being Ralphs application (which is considered to be a federal document because it is submitted to the port authority which is a government entity) and demonstrate that it was false, thus proving that Ralph has a propensity to lie. Furthermore, any witnesses on Ralphs behalf would be properly principaled in order to impeach Ralphs character for ingenuousness as well. (Fed. Ru. Evid. 608).It is true that Ed Norton would testify that Ralph is a great guy and a terrific friend, but he has no business or employment relationship with Ralph. It should be noted that Ed as a character witness will be questioned about detail instances of conduct on get of the Ralph as the principal witness to test his go throughledge on Ralphs character. Thus Ed may be questioned on whether Ralph ever told him about his high trail suspension. It must be noted that any defense team attorney worth their salt would immediately object to the question if at the age of Ralphs arrest, the high school suspension was over decennary years old. This rule applies if more than ten years has elapsed since the by and by date between the following (1) the date of the belief and (2) release of the witness from the confinement imposed for that conviction . Here, it is true that Ralph was not convicted at the time his suspens ion for a crime related to it. One major power first think that the suspension would not find its way into trial however there are exceptions to this rule of evidence. Specific instances of misconduct that did not result in a conviction can be admitted for impeachment purposes if the scope of its admission is to demonstrate the witnesses character for truthfulness, in the discretion of the court the probative value of the question outweighs any prejudice to the defendant the evidence is offered in good faith the act has a ship bearing on the veracity of the witness with regards to the issues being litigated. It cannot be understated that extrinsic evidence of specific instances of prior bad acts is not permitted when their only relevance is to impeach the witnesses credibility. Thus, it appears that Ralphs high school suspension would be admitted at trial. It should be noted again that the trial court enjoys immense discretion so the ten year limitation may be construed by the cou rt to apply to non convicted prior bad acts. For example, if Ralph is 25 at the time of trial, the suspension may be admitted, but if he is 35 at the time of trial, it most likely will not. Finally, we do not usually see this type of evidence offered unless the parties know each other. Fed. Ru. Evid 613, applies to the prior inconsistent statements of a witness. Here, Ralph is prepared to testify that he never said That could still as easily have been your head. In examining a witness