Does section 787 of California Evidence Code 787 preclude evidence to contradict direct testimony of a witness?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Oliphant v. Shah, G050693 (Cal. App. 2015):
Contrary to defendants' argument, Evidence Code section 787 does not, preclude evidence of specific incidents to contradict direct testimony of a witness for example, to show the witness lied about the facts on the stand. (People v. Moses (1972) 24 Cal.App.3d 384, 396-397.)
"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
Does the exclusion of a single item of marginally relevant evidence under California Evidence Code section 352 preclude a defendant from presenting his "consensual sexual relationship" defense? (California, United States of America)
What is the effect of section 702 of California Evidence Code section 702 (a) of the Evidence Code? (California, United States of America)
Does the Court have authority to exclude evidence where a defendant has been found to be contrary to the evidence code under section 352 of the California Evidence Code? (California, United States of America)
Does the application of "ordinary rules of evidence" such as section 352 of California Evidence Code section 352 violate a defendant's constitutional rights? (California, United States of America)
What is the effect of section 356 of the California Evidence Code on the interpretation of the meaning of section 46(1) of the word "admissible in evidence"? (California, United States of America)
When will a court not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence under Evidence Code section 352 of the California Evidence Code? (California, United States of America)
What is the effect of section 356 of the California Evidence Code on a witness giving evidence? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between section 1111 of the California Code of Civil Procedure and the wording of Section 1111, which provides that "a conviction cannot be had upon the testimony of an accomplice unless it be corroborated by such other evidence"? (California, United States of America)
Does section 352 of the California Evidence Code preclude a defendant from presenting all relevant evidence at trial? (California, United States of America)
Does admitting evidence pursuant to California Evidence Code section 1237 impermissibly deny defendants their constitutional rights to confrontation and cross-examination? (California, United States of America)
