The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Little, 753 F.2d 1420 (9th Cir. 1985):
The district court did not abuse its discretion in sustaining the objections and in denying appellants' motion to strike the witness's testimony. The cross-examination related to collateral matters which had no bearing on the truth of the witness's direct testimony. See, e.g., United States v. Seifert, 648 F.2d 557, 561-62 (9th Cir.1980). Moreover, none of the evidence seized in the search was used at trial. Thus, any error resulting from the district court's refusal to strike the witness's testimony was harmless.
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.