CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT P. JANICKE 2012

Chap Impeachment2 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

2012Chap Impeachment3 MEANING OF “EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE” DOING THE IMPEACHMENT BY –CALLING A WITNESS TO IMPEACH THE TARGET WITNESS, OR –INTRODUCING A DOCUMENT TO DO SO

2012Chap Impeachment4 THE GENERAL MODES ARE ATTACKS ON THE WITNESS’S BELIEVABILITY DUE TO SOME GENERAL WEAKNESS AS A WITNESS I.E., A WEAKNESS NOT LIMITED TO THIS PARTICULAR CASE

2012Chap Impeachment5 1.PROVE IMPAIRED GENERAL COMPETENCY –UNABLE TO OBSERVE OR REMEMBER THINGS IN GENERAL, NOT LIMITED TO THIS CASE –EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED

2012Chap Impeachment6 2. POOR CHARACTER FOR VERACITY a. BAD REPUTATION FOR TRUTHFULNESS – EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE ALLOWED, BUT NO SPECIFICS b. PRIOR DISHONEST NON-CONVICTION ACTS, ESTABLISHED ON CROSS. EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE IS NOT ALLOWED

2012Chap Impeachment7 3.CONVICTION OF A CRIME –ANY CRIME INVOLVING DISHONESTY NO WEIGHING PROBATIVE VALUE OR PREJUDICE –ANY FELONY, BUT SUBJECT TO WEIGHING PROBATIVENESS AGAINST RISK OF PREJUDICE –TEN-YEAR LIMIT IN EITHER CASE

2012Chap Impeachment8 –IF THE WITNESS ADMITS TO IT, 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

2012Chap Impeachment9 SPECIFIC MODES ATTACKS ON THE CREDIBILITY OF THE WITNESS IN THIS CASE ONLY THESE ASSUME THAT IN GENERAL THE WITNESS MIGHT HAVE GOOD VERACITY

2012Chap Impeachment10 MODES OF SPECIFIC IMPEACHMENT 4.PROVE IMPAIRED SPECIFIC COMPETENCY, i.e., ON THE OCCASION IN QUESTION –DRUNK –NIGHT-TIME –LOOKING THE OTHER WAY –EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE ALLOWED

2012Chap Impeachment11 5.BIAS OR PREJUDICE –FRIEND OR RELATIVE OF A PARTY –E.G.: BUSINESS OBJECTIVE IF ONE SIDE WINS –E.G.: SIMILARLY SITUATED NEIGHBORS –EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE ALLOWED

2012Chap Impeachment12 6. PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENT OF A WITNESS –EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE ALLOWED; BUT --- –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

PROBLEMS/CASES Abel 8A Lipscomb 8E Exercise #7 2012Chap Impeachment13

2012Chap Impeachment14 WHO CAN BE IMPEACHED ? ANY WITNESS WHO ANSWERS ANY QUESTION PLACES HIS CREDIBILITY IN ISSUE, AND CAN BE IMPEACHED CAN IMPEACH YOUR OWN WITNESS

2012Chap Impeachment15 CAN IMPEACH AN IMPEACHING WITNESS A NON-TESTIFYING PARTY GENERALLY CANNOT BE IMPEACHED

2012Chap Impeachment16 SERIATIM IMPEACHMENT METHODS ARE GENERALLY ALLOWED, SUBJECT TO DISCRETION ON WASTE OF TIME MOST COMMONLY DONE WHEN FIRST METHOD FAILS

2012Chap Impeachment17 EXAMPLE #1 : D. TESTIFIES ON CROSS, PROSECUTOR TRIES TO SHOW PRIOR DISHONEST ACTS – FALSE INCOME TAX RETURN D. DENIES/ADMITS FILING FALSE RETURN PROSECUTOR CAN NOW SWITCH TO CONVICTION OF A CRIME MODE (FILING FALSE RETURN)

2012Chap Impeachment18 EXAMPLE #2 IMPEACH A WITNESS FIRST WITH PRIOR DISHONEST ACTS (CROSS) THEN WITH FELONY CONVICTIONS THEN WITH PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS

2012Chap Impeachment19 SOME SURPRISING THINGS NON-MIRANDIZED STATEMENT CAN BE USED TO IMPEACH A TESTIFYING D. PRE-MIRANDA-WARNING SILENCE CAN BE USED TO IMPEACH A TESTIFYING D.

2012Chap Impeachment20 ILLEGALLY SEIZED ITEMS CAN BE USED TO IMPEACH A TESTIFYING D. –E.G.: ILLEGALLY SEIZED SHIRT WITH NIFTY CUT-OUTS –E.G.: ILLEGALLY SEIZED COCAINE ALL 3 OF ABOVE ARE SAID TO BE NECESSARY TO PROTECT INTEGRITY OF TRIAL SYSTEM

PROBLEMS/CASES Webster Harris Jenkins Havens 8G 2012Chap Impeachment21