cross-examination of witnesses test (Missouri) · Go Syfert
← Missouri issues

cross-examination of witnesses test in Missouri

8 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1913–2012 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Missouri courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Brooksgreen
mo · 1997 · cited in 5 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 1999–2004
2 sentences

2004Appellant’s final point on appeal asserts the trial court erred in overruling Appellant’s objection and allowing the State to cross-examine Dr. Logan about the fact that he had examined a defendant in an unrelated case. “ Wide latitude is afforded the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.’ ” Middleton v. State, 103 S.W.3d 726, 741 (Mo. banc 2003) (quoting State v. Brooks, 960 S.W.2d 479, 493 (Mo. banc 1997)).

2003“Wide latitude is afforded the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.” State v. Brooks, 960 S.W.2d 479, 493 (Mo. banc 1997); State v. Taylor, 745 S.W.2d 173, 175 (Mo.App.1987).

55
Middleton v. Stategreen
mo · 2003 · cited in 2 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2004–2012
2 sentences

2012In questioning a defendant’s expert, the State is afforded wide latitude in “the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.” State v. Zink, 181 S.W.3d 66, 72 (Mo. banc 2005) (quoting Middleton v. State, 103 S.W.3d 726, 741 (Mo. banc 2003)).

2004Appellant’s final point on appeal asserts the trial court erred in overruling Appellant’s objection and allowing the State to cross-examine Dr. Logan about the fact that he had examined a defendant in an unrelated case. “ Wide latitude is afforded the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.’ ” Middleton v. State, 103 S.W.3d 726, 741 (Mo. banc 2003) (quoting State v. Brooks, 960 S.W.2d 479, 493 (Mo. banc 1997)).

22
State v. Parkergreen
mo · 1994 · cited in 2 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 1999–2004
2 sentences

2004Furthermore, “[pjrosecutors have wide latitude in cross-examining psychological experts because the factual basis for psychiatric testimony is particularly important.” State v. Parker, 886 S.W.2d 908, 927 (Mo. banc 1994).

1999This is especially true in the cross-examination of mental health experts, because “the factual basis for psychiatric testimony is particularly important.” State v. Parker, 886 S.W.2d 908, 927 (Mo. banc 1994), cert. denied 514 U.S. 1098 , 115 S.Ct. 1827 , 131 L.Ed.2d 748 (1995).

22
State v. Zinkgreen
mo · 2005 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012In questioning a defendant’s expert, the State is afforded wide latitude in “the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.” State v. Zink, 181 S.W.3d 66, 72 (Mo. banc 2005) (quoting Middleton v. State, 103 S.W.3d 726, 741 (Mo. banc 2003)).

11
Garden v. Midwest Petroleum Co.green
moctapp · 1987 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003
1 sentence

2003“Wide latitude is afforded the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.” State v. Brooks, 960 S.W.2d 479, 493 (Mo. banc 1997); State v. Taylor, 745 S.W.2d 173, 175 (Mo.App.1987).

11
Callahan v. Cardinal Glennon Hospitalgreen
mo · 1993 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
1 sentence

1997See Callahan v. Cardinal Glennon Hosp., 863 S.W.2d 852, 869 (Mo. banc 1993).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
Brooks v. Missouri green
scotus · 1998
2 sentences

2003“Wide latitude is afforded the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.” State v. Brooks, 960 S.W.2d 479, 493 (Mo. banc 1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 957 , 118 S.Ct. 2379 , 141 L.Ed.2d 746 (1998).

1999“Wide latitude is afforded the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.” State v. Brooks, 960 S.W.2d 479, 493 (Mo. banc 1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 2379 , 141 L.Ed.2d 746 (1998).

21999–2003
Washington v. Service Employees' International Union, Local 50 green
scotus · 1998
2 sentences

2003“Wide latitude is afforded the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.” State v. Brooks, 960 S.W.2d 479, 493 (Mo. banc 1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 957 , 118 S.Ct. 2379 , 141 L.Ed.2d 746 (1998).

1999“Wide latitude is afforded the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.” State v. Brooks, 960 S.W.2d 479, 493 (Mo. banc 1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 2379 , 141 L.Ed.2d 746 (1998).

21999–2003
Shown v. Oklahoma green
scotus · 1998
1 sentence

2003“Wide latitude is afforded the cross-examination of witnesses to test qualifications, credibility, skill or knowledge, and the value and accuracy of the expert’s opinion.” State v. Brooks, 960 S.W.2d 479, 493 (Mo. banc 1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 957 , 118 S.Ct. 2379 , 141 L.Ed.2d 746 (1998).

12003–2003
Parker v. Missouri green
scotus · 1995
1 sentence

1999This is especially true in the cross-examination of mental health experts, because “the factual basis for psychiatric testimony is particularly important.” State v. Parker, 886 S.W.2d 908, 927 (Mo. banc 1994), cert. denied 514 U.S. 1098 , 115 S.Ct. 1827 , 131 L.Ed.2d 748 (1995).

11999–1999
Glendora v. Dolan green
scotus · 1995
1 sentence

1999This is especially true in the cross-examination of mental health experts, because “the factual basis for psychiatric testimony is particularly important.” State v. Parker, 886 S.W.2d 908, 927 (Mo. banc 1994), cert. denied 514 U.S. 1098 , 115 S.Ct. 1827 , 131 L.Ed.2d 748 (1995).

11999–1999
Soto v. Keane green
scotus · 1995
1 sentence

1999This is especially true in the cross-examination of mental health experts, because “the factual basis for psychiatric testimony is particularly important.” State v. Parker, 886 S.W.2d 908, 927 (Mo. banc 1994), cert. denied 514 U.S. 1098 , 115 S.Ct. 1827 , 131 L.Ed.2d 748 (1995).

11999–1999
State v. Hack green
mo · 1893
1 sentence

1913And it may be asked of a witness for defendant on cross-examination if' she did not offer the prosecuting witness money if he would go away and not testify against the defendant. [State v. Hack, 118 Mo. 92 .] The rule in regard to the cross-examination of witnesses to test their credibility is thus stated in Stephen’s Digest of the Law of Evidence, art. 129, p. 185: “When a witness is cross-examined, he may, in addition” to matters testified in chief, “be asked any questions which tend to test his accuracy, veracity or credibility; or to shake his credit, by injuring his character.

11913–1913

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check