Does a trial court have a constitutional right to cross-examining a witness during cross-examination?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Byrd, F077681 (Cal. App. 2020):
A trial court's exercise of its discretion to exclude evidence does not implicate or infringe upon a defendant's federal constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him or her, unless the prohibited cross-examination might reasonably have produced a significantly different impression of the witness's credibility. (People v. Brown, supra, 31 Cal.4th at pp. 545-546.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
Other Questions
Is a defendant's claim that the trial court's failure to provide him with the means and subpoena witnesses to defend at trial a violation of his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself at trial reversible? (California, United States of America)
Is there any case law supporting a defendant's contention that the trial court violated his constitutional right to confront witnesses in the witness box? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
Is a plaintiff's right to call a witness that is not a witness in the trial of a defendant not to be reviewed by the Court of Appeal? (California, United States of America)
How does the Court treat a claim by a defendant that an issue raised and decided in the trial court resulted in constitutional violations? (California, United States of America)
Does defendant's voluntary absence operate to waive his constitutional right to be present at trial and permitted continuation of the trial? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a defendant's claim that he was denied his constitutional right to due process of law because the trial court relieved the prosecution of its burden of establishing that defendant acted with malice? (California, United States of America)
Does the majority of the Supreme Court hold that there is no constitutional right to jury trial on the issue of premeditation? (California, United States of America)
Does a witness who disowns his out-of-court identification have an opportunity to question the witness on the witness stand? (California, United States of America)
Does the Court of Appeal have found that Defendant Joiner did not waive his assumed constitutional right to be personally present at the remand hearing and that the court erred in conducting that hearing in his absence? (California, United States of America)
