California Codes
Cal. Evidence Code § 700 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov
JustiaCode on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Except as otherwise provided by statute, every person, irrespective of age, is qualified to be a witness and no person is disqualified to testify to any matter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: People v. Zambrano, 163 P.3d 4 (Cal. 2007).
People v. Zambrano, 163 P.3d 4 (Cal. 2007). “(Evid.Code, § 700.) A person is disqualified as a witness only if he or she is `[i]ncapable of expressing himself or herself [understandably] concerning the [testimonial] matter' ( id.”
People v. Mincey, 827 P.2d 388 (Cal. 1992). “(13) Defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in concluding that Wendy was competent to testify, because the trial court's voir dire of her was inadequate to determine whether Wendy was capable of recounting her impressions of the pertinent events, and…”
People v. Flinner, 476 P.3d 240 (Cal. 2020). “” (Evid. Code, § 700.) A person is completely disqualified from testifying under Evidence Code section 701, subdivision (a) if he or she is “(1) [i]ncapable of expressing himself or herself concerning the matter so as to be understood .”
People v. Sanchez, 439 P.3d 772 (Cal. 2019). “"Except as otherwise provided by statute, every person, irrespective of age , is qualified to be a witness and no person is disqualified to testify to any matter.”
People v. Roberto v., 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9993 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). “” The court did not conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine Maria’s competence.”
State v. McAboy, 236 S.E.2d 431 (W. Va. 1977). “Stat.Ann. § 15:495 (West); Mass.Gen.Laws Ann.”
People v. Giron-Chamul, 245 Cal. App. 4th 932 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). “The court also disagreed that daughter’s more unbelievable statements — including her claims that her father had put his mouth on his own penis and had molested her in front of many other people — bore on her competency, stating that “there is a distinction between a person…”
People v. Cudjo, 863 P.2d 635 (Cal. 1993). “the federal Constitution; (3) admission of the testimony violated defendant’s right to a reliable verdict under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution; (4) the trial court erred in not instructing the jury on its own motion to view the testimony with…”
People v. Dennis, 950 P.2d 1035 (Cal. 1998). “) A person may be disqualified as a witness for one of two reasons: (1) the witness is incapable of expressing himself or herself so as to be understood, or (2) the witness is incapable of understanding the duty to tell the truth. (Evid. Code, § 701, subd. (a).) The party…”
Ho Yim v. William Barr, 972 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 2020). “” Cal. Evid. Code § 700 . But there is an exception for persons who are incompetent to testify.”
Los Angeles Cnty. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs. v. Edgar L., 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9718 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997). “court explained, every person regardless of age is competent to testify (Evid. Code, § 700) except if he or she is “[ijncapable of expressing himself or herself concerning the matter so as to be understood .”
People v. Anderson, 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3861 (Cal. 2001). “persons suffering from mental impairment to testify in some instances where they [were previously] disqualified from testifying.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.