![]() 438 (1993) (after defendant asked prosecution witness on re-cross whether he was changing his testimony, trial court’s sustaining of an objection was appropriate to protect witness from harassment or undue embarrassment, while still making interrogation effective for ascertainment of truth) State v. ![]() 8C-611(a)(1)-(3), Official Commentary (“The Rule sets forth the objectives the court should seek to obtain rather than spelling out detailed rules”). This rule vests the trial court with wide discretion to govern the details of the trial in order to: (i) promote effective determination of the truth (ii) avoid wasting time and (iii) protect witnesses from undue harassment and embarrassment. Rule 611(a) states that the court shall exercise “reasonable control” over both the manner and order of the examination of witnesses and presentation of evidence. When a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party, interrogation may be by leading questions. Ordinarily leading questions should be permitted on cross-examination. Leading questions should not be used on the direct examination of a witness except as may be necessary to develop his testimony. A witness may be cross-examined on any matter relevant to any issue in the case, including credibility. (3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment. (2) avoid needless consumption of time, and (1) make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth, The court shall exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to Rule 611 – Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |