Reexamination Flashcards

Under Connecticut Practice Book rules, how many rounds of witness examination are permitted as of right?

Answer: Direct, cross, redirect, and recross; further rounds at court discretion

Connecticut follows the traditional four-round framework of direct, cross, redirect, and recross, with additional rounds permitted in the court's discretion.

On recross-examination in Connecticut, counsel asks about a topic never raised on redirect. The proper objection is:

Answer: Beyond the scope of redirect

Recross is limited to matters addressed on redirect; a question outside redirect scope should be objected to as beyond the scope.

Which of the following best describes 'rehabilitation' as a goal of redirect examination?

Answer: Restoring a witness's credibility after impeachment on cross

Rehabilitation on redirect aims to restore the credibility of a witness whose believability was attacked during cross-examination.

A criminal defendant takes the stand and is cross-examined about prior bad acts. On redirect, defense counsel may:

Answer: Have the defendant explain the context of those acts

On redirect, the defendant-witness may explain or contextualize prior bad acts raised by the prosecutor on cross.

In Connecticut, if redirect examination opens a new topic not covered on cross, opposing counsel:

Answer: May recross on the new topic raised during redirect

When redirect introduces a new topic, fairness allows recross to address that newly raised matter.

A hostile witness is examined by the calling party using leading questions. On redirect after cross, the calling party should use:

Answer: Leading questions, since the hostility designation remains

A witness declared hostile retains that designation throughout the examination, so leading questions remain permissible on redirect.

Under Connecticut Evidence Code principles, prior consistent statements offered on redirect to rebut a charge of recent fabrication must have been made:

Answer: Before the motive to fabricate arose

To rebut a charge of recent fabrication, the prior consistent statement must predate the alleged motive to fabricate.