When a witness is impeached with a prior statement’s inconsistencies or omissions, does that entitle the proponent to introduce the entire remainder of the impeaching statement? How is this to be managed if there were only two or three impeaching points, and the statement itself ran for over 40 pages and had material not testified to on direct? May this be done in the rebuttal case? And does any of this have to do with the “rule of completeness” [Pa.R.Evid. 106]?
These are the issues the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will resolve in a matter argued in December, Commonwealth v. Raboin. The court allowed appeal on the following:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]