on cross examination what objections can be made to defense attorney

If an attorney asks a question during cross-examination that is beyond the scope of the direct examination, the attorney should object to the question. Assumes facts not in evidence - In certain instances, an attorney may ask a question that assumes a fact not yet in evidence.

Full Answer

What is an objection to cross examination?

Sep 24, 2012 · The scope of cross examination is determined by the subject matter covered on direct. If the defense attorney asks a question regarding subject matter not covered on direct, you will probably hear...

Can a witness object to a cross-examination?

- The prerequisite evidence has not been entered that would make this evidence admissible. This could be proof that a confession has been made knowingly and voluntarily (predicate), that a witness is competent to testify to a fact, or that a document is admissible. - This is a good objection to make when you’re sure that the evidence

What happens if a witness objects to a questioning attorney?

Defense counsel Lana Manitta makes several points on cross examination, including, but not limited to, that the scientist cannot determine when any particular cartridges were fired, that any particular cartridges were fired on the same day as each other, and whether any of the cartridges actually passed through a person.

How does a criminal defense attorney conduct a cross-examination of an expert?

This doctrine also permits the introduction of extrinsic (outside) evidence to contradict answers given on cross-examination, if the cross-examination questions were reasonably suggested by the direct examination. A criminal defense attorney may be able to squelch the use of this technique by objecting to the initial cross-examination questions as being irrelevant, and then …

What objections can be made during cross-examination?

Objections to TestimonyRelevance of Answer/Question.Question Lacks Foundation.Lacks Personal Knowledge/Speculation.Creation of a Material Fact.Improper Character Evidence.Lay Witness Opinion.Hearsay.Mar 4, 2017

What are three types of objections?

The Three Most Common Objections Made During Trial TestimonyHearsay. A common, if not the most common trial objection to a trial testimony objection is hearsay. ... Leading. A close second objection is to leading questions. ... Relevancy. The last of the three (3) of the most common objections is relevancy.

Can you object during cross-examination?

When a witness starts responding to a question with information that is completely unrelated to the question, you can object to it as being “non-responsive.” This can be especially important in cross-examination when you are looking for very specific “yes” or “no” answers.

What are valid objections?

List of objections. Proper reasons for objecting to a question asked to a witness include: Ambiguous, confusing, misleading, vague, unintelligible: the question is not clear and precise enough for the witness to properly answer. Arguing the law: counsel is instructing the jury on the law.

What are the 4 types of objections?

This is unfortunate because nearly all sales objections come down to one of these four things: need, urgency, trust and money.Lack Of Need. A client must need what you're selling. ... Lack Of Urgency. You've built the relationship, money isn't an issue and the client believes you can help. ... Lack of Trust. ... Lack Of Money.Dec 22, 2021

What are the five different types of objections?

5 Common Sales Objections and How to Handle ThemObjection 1: "We're Good. We already have someone and they're doing a good job." ... OBJECTION 2: "Your price is too high." ... OBJECTION 3: "You're all the same. ... OBJECTION 4: "Just send me info and I'll get back to you." ... OBJECTION 5: "This isn't a priority right now."

What are the two kinds of objections?

Types of ObjectionsProduct objection.Source objection.Price objection.Money objection.“I'm already satisfied” objection.“I have to think about it” objection.

How do you argue objections?

Stand up and face the judge. Don't give in to the temptation to face the opposing attorney who is making the objection. State your responses succinctly, being as specific as possible about the legal grounds for admissibility. Give a one-sentence non-legal explanation for the benefit of the jury.

What do you say to an objection?

Making the Objection Stand and say, for example, “Objection your honor that question lacks foundation. May I be heard?” If the court allows, explain your issue. Always ask to be heard before explaining or rebutting. Always address the judge, not the other lawyer.

What is objection sustained?

If a judge sustains the objection, it means that the judge agrees with the objection and disallows the question, testimony or evidence. If the judge overrules the objection, it means that the judge disagrees with the objection and allows the question, testimony or evidence.

What are the most common objections in court?

If you'd like to learn about 13 additional common courtroom objections that you will likely face at trial (and how to handle them), like: hearsay, improper character evidence, unfair prejudice, leading questions, badgering the witness, and more — check out the video litigation tutorial — Trial Objections 101: Making ...Sep 27, 2019

What is objection argumentative?

In the American legal system, argumentative is an evidentiary objection raised in response to a question which prompts a witness to draw inferences from facts of the case.

What is compound question?

Compound question. A compound question is when two or more questions are combined as one question. Compound questions are not allowed because they can confuse the witness, the judge, and the jury. Also, it may not be clear for the court record which of the questions the witness is answering.

What is a vague question?

Vague. A vague question is when it is difficult or impossible to tell what the question is about. You would want to object to a vague question that is asked of your witness because of the risk that the witness will misunderstand the question and say something that will hurt your case.

Is testimony considered hearsay?

If a witness tries to testify about what a non-party told him/her or tries to enter into evidence something in writing that a non-party wrote, then the testimony or written evidence is objectionable as hearsay. However, there are hearsay exceptions that may apply.

What is prerequisite evidence?

The prerequisite evidence has not been entered that would make this evidence admissible. This could be proof that a confession has been made knowingly and voluntarily (predicate), that a witness is competent to testify to a fact, or that a document is admissible.

When is a Daubert challenge used?

Used when the testimony involves some degree of skill or expertise and the witness has not been entered as an expert in that area. Daubert challenges are covered under this objection, and do not have to come pre-trial.

When to use "crazy"?

Used when a question or an answer describes something that is highly prejudicial and not helpful to the jury. A typical example is describing the defendant or her actions as “crazy.” This is a charged word and has no real meaning unless the witness is a medical doctor who actually means “crazy.” - It’s not a very useful objection most of the time because the objection generally draws more attention to the word and thus cements the idea into the minds of the jurors.

Is "direct" an objection on cross?

The question on direct suggests an answer. This is (1) not a objection on cross, and (2) actually allowed in some circumstances. Which circumstances depends on the court, as Louisiana and the Federal rules differ, but this basically covers all cases where leading is necessary to develop the testimony.

What is an objection in a case?

An objection is a statement made by an attorney during a case for the purpose of questioning or challenging any specific evidence. Often, the end goal of the objection is to have evidence limited or altogether ruled inadmissible by the judge. In the US legal system, objections are part of evidence codes, and can be extremely complicated.

What is an objection to a foundation question?

This objection is made when opposing counsel asks a question before establishing foundation for that question. If the objection is sustained, the judge will require counsel to “lay a foundation” which involves backtracking and asking a more general question. This objection is most often encountered while describing circumstances during direct examination. Often attorneys will cut foundational questions at the start of examination in an effort to save time, so this is where most of the objections will be made.

What is character evidence?

This objection is made when improper character evidence has been given as testimony in court. Improper character evidence is when character evidence (think general personality traits) is used to show how a person acted in a specific situation. There are three exceptions to this rule in which this kind of character evidence is permissible: 1 If this evidence is offered by the defense and applied to the character and actions of the defendant to prove innocence, it is admissible. 2 If this evidence is offered by the defense and applied to the character and actions of the victim to prove innocence, it is admissible. 3 If this evidence is offered to show dishonesty or a tendency to lie by any witness, it is admissible. In this situation, the opposing counsel may rebut with positive character evidence to show the contrary.

Why should irrelevant evidence be excluded?

There are several reasons why irrelevant evidence should be excluded. Primarily, it contributes nothing to the case, it may sometimes reflect negatively on either side, and it also wastes precious time which should be used to tackle the real questions. An attorney can object to an irrelevant question asked by opposing counsel, or to an answer which is either in parts, or altogether, irrelevant. Use discretion with this objection, and don’t overuse, as what is relevant can be highly subjective.

Who is Anamaria from Collegevine?

Anamaria is an Economics major at Columbia University who's passionate about sharing her knowledge of admissions with students facing the applications process. When she's not writing for the CollegeVine blog, she's studying Russian literature and testing the limits of how much coffee one single person can consume in a day.

Why is hearsay considered unreliable?

This kind of testimony is considered hearsay because the actual declarant of the statement in question is neither under oath on the stand, nor will be cross examined. Therefore, hearsay is considered unreliable and inadmissible except in limited circumstances. Because of several exceptions to the hearsay rule, this objection is often the most difficult for new attorneys to understand. The following are some of the more common exceptions in which hearsay is allowed for the truth of the matter:

What is the first type of objection?

The first type of objection is an objection to the form of the question asked, or answer given. When an attorney makes this type of objection, they are objecting to the nature of the question or answer, but not to its substance. Although equally valid, some judges often prefer to hear less of these objections.

Sample Cross-Examination Transcripts

Following are sample transcripts that include the state's direct examination as well the defense attorney's cross-examination of state experts. Before conducting the cross-examination of an expert witness, the criminal defense attorney must become an expert in forensic evidence as well as the basic principals of forensics .

Cross-Examination of Informants

Summary :Defense counsel James G. Connell conducts a thorough cross-examination of a government cooperating witness in a federal drug conspiracy case.

What can be asked on cross examination?

A witness who has provided good character evidence on direct examination can be asked on cross-examination if he or she knows of specific bad acts that the defendant committed, if they are relevant to the character trait, and whether knowledge of those acts would change the witness’s opinion or testimony as to reputation. This cross-examination can include questions about arrests, as well as acts for which no criminal charges were filed. For example, in a case in which the defendant was charged with the illegal transfer of automatic weapons, witnesses who testified to the defendant’s character as an honest and law-abiding citizen were properly cross-examined as to allegations that he was behind on child support and allegations of sexual harassment at his workplace. Some states, however, forbid the prosecution from cross-examination about arrests and ucharged conduct. Since the asking of the question alone suggests to the jury that the defendant has an undisclosed sordid past, the cautious check the jurisdiction’s rules and take steps to preclude cross-examination on any forbidden areas. There are some limits on the prosecutor’s cross-examination of a character witness. The prosecutor must have a good faith basis (which can be pretty weak) that the facts implied in his question are true. More important as a practical matter, most courts forbid questions that assume the defendant’s guilt of the very charges for which he is on trial.

What is impeachment by contradiction?

This doctrine of impeachment by contradiction trumps other rules that make certain types of evidence inadmissible (e.g., the rule prohibiting the use of illegally seized evidence, and the rule prohibiting the use of evidence of other crimes). This doctrine also permits the introduction of extrinsic (outside) evidence to contradict answers given on cross-examination, if the cross-examination questions were reasonably suggested by the direct examination. A criminal defense attorney may be able to squelch the use of this technique by objecting to the initial cross-examination questions as being irrelevant, and then objecting to any offer of extrinsic contradicting evidence as collateral, irrelevant, and likely to confuse the jury. The defense attorney should make the argument that the prosecutor should not be allowed introduce extraneous topics solely to set up the contradiction. However, the best antidote to this type of cross-examination is good preparation. Both the defense attorney and the defendant need to be ready for this type of cross-examination. The defendant must learn to answer questions directly and succinctly, without volunteering self-serving information or exaggerating his moral purity. The defense attorney must really get to know his or her client, and unearth before trial any skeletons about which the defendant would lie to avoid their exhumation (e.g., other crimes; infidelities; petty deceits on friends and family; embarrassing scams). If the defendant and the defense attorney have an honest conversation about these matters before trial, then the defense attorney will realize where the prosecutor might be heading with certain questions and be ready to object, and the defendant will be prepared to admit the truth if the objection is overruled. The defense lawyer can then argue to the jury in closing that the prosecutor took cheap shots, but the defendant owned up to his indiscretions.

Can a defendant consult with his lawyer during brief recesses?

The trial court can forbid the defendant from consulting with his criminal defense lawyer during brief recesses, but a ban on overnight consultation, even when the prosecution is in the middle of its cross-examination, violates the criminal defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

Do prosecutions cross-examine witnesses?

If a defense witness has a long criminal record, the defense attorney simply will not call him to the stand. However, prosecutors often must call victims, informants and coconspirators who carry baggage containing long criminal records and promises of favorable treatment. Most defense witnesses, except in white-collar cases, do not leave the same trail of prior reports and testimony that prosecution witnesses do as gist for a prior inconsistent statements cross-examination. Consequently, prosecutors often resort to several routine techniques on cross-examination. A sharp criminal defense lawyer can defeat some of these routine techniques with valid evidentiary objections; others may be neutralized by preparing the defense witness.

What to ask opposing counsel when making a relevance objection to evidence?

If opposing counsel makes a relevance objection to evidence you want to introduce, you should ask the judge, “Your Honor, may I make an offer of proof?” This is courtroom-speak for “Let me explain why this is relevant.” Assuming the judge allows it, you would then explain what you expect the witness to say and how it is relevant (how it relates to a fact that’s important for the judge’s verdict).

What are the objections to a question?

Questions have to be asked in a proper form or way. The following 6 objections can be made to the way a question is asked. 1. Vague and Ambiguous. An attorney object to a question if it cannot be understood. Often, questions are vague because they contain an unclear reference.

What are mock trial objections?

There are two broad categories of mock trial objections: (1) objections to the form of the question and (2) objections to testimony.

How do attorneys score points?

Attorneys score points by understanding the rules of evidence and making and arguing mock trial objections convincingly. There really is no better way to master objections than to keep practicing.

What is relevant evidence?

There is a low threshold for relevance. Relevant evidence is evidence that has an impact on an important fact in the case. If evidence shows that an important fact is more (or less) likely to be true, then the evidence is relevant.

What is narrative witness?

A narrative is when the witness talks non-stop, without interruption. The witness must answer the attorney’s question and only the attorney’s question. They can’t just get on the stand and recite their witness statement.

What is an expert witness?

Unlike lay witnesses, expert witnesses have special knowledge, education, training, experience, or skill. They can testify to their opinions about matters even if they don’t have personal knowledge of them.

Relevance of Answer/Question

Question Lacks Foundation

Lacks Personal Knowledge/Speculation

• This objection is made when either an attorney asks the witness a question of which they have no personal knowledge, or when a witness begins to testify about something they have not directly observed (speculation). Witnesses are only allowed to testify about their own direct experiences and thoughts. Testifying as to what they believe may have hap...

See more on blog.collegevine.com

Creation of A Material Fact

Improper Character Evidence

Lay Witness Opinion

Hearsay