What is the proper procedure for cross-examining a police officer's accident report?

Typically, in the situation where past recollection is refreshed, the law enforcement officer called to testify as a witness will peruse the accident report several times prior to trial, and having convinced himself that he now remembers the incident with clarity and accuracy, will testify concerning the facts. The opposing attorney, who usually has the report before him, is permitted to cross-examine the officer concerning it. If the officer's statements in court are in conflict with statements contained in the document, he can impeach the officer. (Evid. Code, 771, subd. (b).) He can ask whether or not a fact stated in the report is true (Evid. Code, 771, subd. (b)) and even inquire as to whether or not the officer asked the witness certain questions (Carroll v. Beavers (1954), supra, 126 Cal.App.2d 828, 273 P.2d 56). The net result is, of course, that the contents of the report, if otherwise admissible, are presented to the jury.