Is it a constitutional violation to restrict cross-examination?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Ruiz, B251264 (Cal. App. 2015):
restriction on a defendant's desired method of cross-examination is a constitutional violation . . . the trial court retains wide latitude in restricting cross-examination that is . . . confusing of the issues, or of marginal relevance"]; People v. Jones (1998) 17 Cal.4th 279, 305.)
"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
What is the "necessity" test for determining whether a restriction or restriction on a prisoner's constitutional rights is restrictive enough to be struck down? (California, United States of America)
Does the concurrence provision in the Federal Constitution violate the federal constitution? (California, United States of America)
Does the exclusion of evidence in a civil case constitute a constitutional violation? (California, United States of America)
Is a violation of customary international law an violation of state or federal constitutional law? (California, United States of America)
Does a statutory violation of Section 10 of the Civil Code of Civil Procedure constitute a violation of due process and a failure to render effective assistance of counsel? (California, United States of America)
Does a failure to instruct on defense of property constitute a constitutional violation? (California, United States of America)
Does a prosecutor who makes a statement before a jury that touches on one defendant's right to silence and representation constitute a constitutional violation? (California, United States of America)
Does a custodial interrogation during an interview with a police officer constitute a constitutional violation? (California, United States of America)
Does a prosecutor who makes a statement before a jury that touches on one defendant's right to silence and representation constitute a constitutional violation? (California, United States of America)
Does section 12022.53 of the California Penal Code, which imposes a life sentence on a repeat offender for vicariously using a firearm, constitute a constitutional violation? (California, United States of America)
