Convictions, Cross-Examination, Impeachment

When a witness is being cross-examined, it is generally considered fair game to attempt to impeach or discredit the witness by asking about any criminal convictions. Section 491.050, RSMo provides in relevant part:
“any prior criminal convictions may be proved to affect [witness] credibility in a civil or criminal case and, further, any prior pleas of guilty, pleas of nolo contendere, and findings of guilty may be proved to affect [witness] credibility in a criminal case. Such proof may be either by the record or by his [or her] own cross-examination, upon which he [or she] must answer any question relevant to that inquiry”
Additionally, the Missouri Supreme Court has found that it is universally acceptable to cross-examine a witness about prior convictions even though the convictions do not involve similar facts. The reason for this is that the witnesses credibility is in issue and may be impaired by prior criminal convictions. As a result, it is important to discuss any past criminal convictions when preparing for testimony and cross-examination.

Related Articles

Tortious Interference: “Improper Means”

August 23, 2023

Tortious interference with business expectancies or contractual relations claims are difficult to make. Tortious interference in Missouri has five elements: (1) the plaintiff was involved in a valid business relationship; (2) the defendant was aware of that relationship; (3) the defendant intentionally interfered with that relationship, inducing its termination; (4) the defendant acted without justification; and…

Read More

Abandoned Pleadings

August 2, 2023

Once a pleading — whether it be a petition, answer, etc. —  is amended the prior iteration of the pleading is considered “abandoned.” Unless the subsequent pleading adopts or incorporates the contents of a prior pleading, the abandoned pleadings is largely irrelevant. In no uncertain terms, Missouri courts have described it as a “mere scrap…

Read More

Appealing Dismissals Without Prejudice

July 28, 2023

The default rule is that only judgments on the merits or dismissals with prejudice may be appealed. Dismissals without prejudice mean that the litigant can re-plead and pursue the claims; so, the court of appeals is often reluctant to touch a dismissal without prejudice until the trial court had made a final decision. To that end, there…

Read More

Strict Construction, Implied Authority to Act as Attorney-in-Fact

July 14, 2023

Power of attorney instruments are “strictly construed.” In re Estate of Lambur, 397 S.W.3d 54, 65 (Mo. App. S.D. 2013). While the definition of strict construction varies depending on who you ask, most agree that it calls for a more narrow, literal interpretation of a document. A strict construction, though, does not preclude “implied authority to…

Read More
Scroll to Top