Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Notes court divides majority says reversible error

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Ex: Witness in bank robbery case identifies D as the bank robber. Defense calls a different witness who says D was not the bank robber. Clearly admissible, has probative value independent of any incidental impact it may have on the first witness' credibility. Offering evidence that contradicts a witness' testimony as to a TANGENTIAL fact, is considered collateral and may not be proved by extrinsic evidence. Ex: Witness in bank robbery case says the bank teller wasn't wearing lipstick. Defense can't call in a witness to say the bank teller was wearing lipstick b/c whether or not THE BANK TELLER was wearing lipstick is inconsequential to the merits of the case. The testimony of the defense witness would have no probative value independent of the impact it would have on the first witness' credibility and therefore would be considered a "collateral matter" that could only be contradicted through cross-examination of the first witness. Contradiction simply means offering evidence either by a questioning on cross or by extrinsic that something that the other perso...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online