Does appellant have to testify at a hearing to determine whether his prior consistent statements were admissible?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Hitchings, 59 Cal.App.4th 915, 69 Cal.Rptr.2d 484 (Cal. App. 1997):
Here, appellant did not testify at his second trial. Thus, he did not testify at "the hearing" at which the question of whether his prior consistent statements were admissible arose. (See People v. Williams, supra, 16
Page 489
"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 a juvenile court hearing determine whether a minor should be tried as an adult prior to a determination that the minor's guilt should be determined? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, does the appellate court have power to substitute its factual determination for that factual determination? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a jury to determine whether or not to consider appellant's youth in determining the reasonableness of any belief he had in the need to act in self-defense? (California, United States of America)
Is a court's failure to instruct the jury how to assess credibility or how to determine whether defendant's statements were confessions or admissions an error? (California, United States of America)
When will a court order a section 987.8 hearing be held to determine whether or not the appellant is able to pay attorney fees? (California, United States of America)
Are portions of each accomplice's statement to the police admissible under the prior inconsistent statement exception? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a search warrant can be used to determine whether or not a search and seizure of a suspect was unlawful? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the rule that prior determination is not conclusive either if injustice would result or if the public interest requires that the prior determination not to be foreclosed? (California, United States of America)
Can expert testimony be used to assist the jury in determining whether a statement or series of statements implied defamatory facts? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant has been convicted of a prior criminal offence and therefore must proceed further to determine the conduct underlying the conviction? (California, United States of America)
