Can a defense counsel attack the credibility of a witness by cross-examination of the witness?

"Except as otherwise provided by statute, the ... jury may consider in determining the credibility of a witness any matter that has any tendency in reason to prove or disprove the truthfulness of his testimony at the hearing, including ... [] ... [] (f) The existence or nonexistence of a bias, interest, or other motive." ( 780.) Accordingly, "[a] party can offer evidence, by proffered extrinsic evidence or by cross-examination of a witness, to attack the credibility of a witness, if such evidence tends reasonably to establish that the witness has a motive to fabricate, or some other motive, that tends to cause the giving of untruthful testimony, even though there may be no reasonable basis for the existence of such a motive. [Citations.]" (People v. Allen (1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 924, 931, fn. omitted; accord, People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, 544 [defendant entitled to explore whether witness offered inducements or expects benefits for testimony].) "[T]he pendency of criminal charges is material to a witness' motivation in testifying even where no express 'promises of leniency or immunity' have been made. During trial, defense counsel 'is permitted to inquire whether charges are pending against

Page 41