Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Rule applies only when the purpose of the review was

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: the story; not the lawyer. Out of the lawyer's mouth it's hearsay, it's not personal knowledge....let's hear it in the witness's words... The way to detect leadings is listen and see who is telling the story...is the lawyer telling the story and the witness is just saying (yes or no) or is the witness telling the story. A little bit of leading on certain matters is always permissible. (You work as an architect is that right? Don't have to say what is your job?) More tolerance for leading is allowed with children, mentally incapacitated, and people with language difficulties. One legitimate purpose of leading questions is to refresh memory. On cross of course, not only are leading questions allowed but it is the goldstand....basically just want the witness to answer yes or no. LAWRENCE v. STATE [Mode & Order of Interrogation: Leading Questions FRE 611(c)] Facts/Procedural Posture: Appellants jointly indicted for felony theft Appellants contend that trial court erred in allowing the state to ask its principal witness a le...
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