California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from The People v. Baldwin, B217438, No. BA286340 (Cal. App. 2010):
admitted for that purpose. But such an unexpressed hope does not dispel the relevance of the inconsistent statement for the independent, non-hearsay purpose of casting doubt on the defendant's credibility as the declarant of incriminating party admissions used by the prosecution. Further, as one court observed, "section 1202 embodies the legislative judgment that the jury is able to distinguish between considering hearsay for truth and for impeachment." (People v. Corella, supra, 122 Cal.App.4th at p. 471.) As we have noted, in this case, defense counsel made clear that he expected that a limiting instruction would be given to the jury to consider the statements only with regard to defendant's credibility as a declarant.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.