Does providing testimony in a civil case open you up to cross in a criminal case?

[pditty8811]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
WA


Does providing testimony via sworn statement in a civil case open you up to cross in a criminal case?

Say the civil case is in relation to an incident that occurred in a criminal case (dismissed without prejudice), can provided written testimony in the civil case be referred to to reopen the criminal case and obligating the witness to be open to cross examination in the criminal case, if that written testimony is provided as evidence in the criminal case?

P.S. Assuming that in the dismissed criminal case the witness has not provided any testimony, so is not obligated to cross-examination when the case was dismissed. Let's also assume that the party in the criminal case providing the written testimony of the witness from the civil case, is the party opposing the witness in the criminal case.

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
WA


Does providing testimony via sworn statement in a civil case open you up to cross in a criminal case?

Say the civil case is in relation to an incident that occurred in a criminal case (dismissed without prejudice), can provided written testimony in the civil case be referred to to reopen the criminal case and obligating the witness to be open to cross examination in the criminal case, if that written testimony is provided as evidence in the criminal case?

P.S. Assuming that in the dismissed criminal case the witness has not provided any testimony, so is not obligated to cross-examination when the case was dismissed. Let's also assume that the party in the criminal case providing the written testimony of the witness from the civil case, is the party opposing the witness in the criminal case.

I am not really sure what you are asking - or why you are asking it.

Have you been called to testify as a witness in a civil action?

If what you testify to in the civil action can be used by prosecutors in a related criminal case, you can be subpoenaed as a witness in the criminal case.

It can be very smart, by the way, for a witness to consult with an attorney prior to testifying.

 

[pditty8811]

I am not really sure what you are asking - or why you are asking it.

Have you been called to testify as a witness in a civil action?

If what you testify to in the civil action can be used by prosecutors in a related criminal case, you can be subpoenaed as a witness in the criminal case.

It can be very smart, by the way, for a witness to consult with an attorney prior to testifying.

That is not what I'm asking. Let me clarify:

Say I have a client that just had a criminal case dismissed without prejudice. In that criminal case my client was not open for cross examination because he was not a witness nor did he offer testimony, therefore he was protected by the self-incrimination clause to not take the stand if asked to.

That client now wants to file a civil case in relation to that criminal case. The client wants to offer written testimony to support that civil case. Can the prosecutor use that written testimony to reopen the criminal case to then make my client a witness to that criminal case, unprotected by the self-incrimination clause, forcing my client to testify on the stand in that criminal case?

Thanks.

 

[quincy]

That is not what I'm asking. Let me clarify:

Say I have a client that just had a criminal case dismissed without prejudice. In that criminal case my client was not open for cross examination because he was not a witness nor did he offer testimony, therefore he was protected by the self-incrimination clause to not take the stand if asked to.

That client now wants to file a civil case in relation to that criminal case. The client wants to offer written testimony to support that civil case. Can the prosecutor use that written testimony to reopen the criminal case to then make my client a witness to that criminal case, unprotected by the self-incrimination clause, forcing my client to testify on the stand in that criminal case?

Thanks.

Witnesses have the right to plead the Fifth in any trial.

However, why would your client want to incriminate himself through written testimony for a civil action if to do so he opens himself up to being subpoenaed as a witness in a criminal action?

Was your client the defendant in the criminal case?

And who are you in this? How is the witness your client?

 

[latigo]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
WA

Does providing testimony via sworn statement in a civil case open you up to cross in a criminal case?

Say the civil case is in relation to an incident that occurred in a criminal case (dismissed without prejudice), can provided written testimony in the civil case be referred to to reopen the criminal case and obligating the witness to be open to cross examination in the criminal case, if that written testimony is provided as evidence in the criminal case?

P.S. Assuming that in the dismissed criminal case the witness has not provided any testimony, so is not obligated to cross-examination when the case was dismissed. Let's also assume that the party in the criminal case providing the written testimony of the witness from the civil case, is the party opposing the witness in the criminal case.

What you've posted here is nothing but legalese gibberish. Examples:

a criminal case (dismissed without prejudice)

When you grow up read the Fifth Amendment

providing testimony via a sworn statement

Try reading the hearsay evidence rule

the witness has not provided any testimony, so is not obligated to cross-examination when the case was dismissed.

How the blazes can a person be a witness that "has not provided any testimony"?

 

[quincy]

Thank you, latigo, for showing me I am not the only one confused by what has been posted.

 

[Zigner]

Let's see if I have this right by using this scenario: The guy was on the witness list relating to a robbery, but never had to testify because the case was dismissed. Then, the same guy files a civil suit against the guy who he saw commit the robbery. Can his testimony (in whatever form) be used to reopen the criminal trial and cause him to be forced to testify?

This sounds to me like an author trying to flesh out a scenario for a book.

 

[quincy]

Let's see if I have this right by using this scenario: The guy was on the witness list relating to a robbery, but never had to testify because the case was dismissed. Then, the same guy files a civil suit against the guy who he saw commit the robbery. Can his testimony (in whatever form) be used to reopen the criminal trial and cause him to be forced to testify?

This sounds to me like an author trying to flesh out a scenario for a book.

It could be a writer.

Not necessarily a good writer.

Perhaps if our poster could leave out the legal words it might help in our understanding.

 

[pditty8811]

Witnesses have the right to plead the Fifth in any trial.

However, why would your client want to incriminate himself through written testimony for a civil action if to do so he opens himself up to being subpoenaed as a witness in a criminal action?


Was your client the defendant in the criminal case?

And who are you in this? How is the witness your client?

Thanks for the answer.

My client has a good chance at monetary gains in the civil case.

My client was the defendant in the criminal case.


I am my client's legal adviser.

 

[pditty8811]

Let's see if I have this right by using this scenario: The guy was on the witness list relating to a robbery, but never had to testify because the case was dismissed. Then, the same guy files a civil suit against the guy who he saw commit the robbery. Can his testimony (in whatever form) be used to reopen the criminal trial and cause him to be forced to testify?

This sounds to me like an author trying to flesh out a scenario for a book.

Correct, but not on one thing. The guy was the defendant in the robbery. The guy is trying to file a suit against an entity which he certainly has a good case.

 

[quincy]

Correct, but not on one thing. The guy was the defendant in the robbery. The guy is trying to file a suit against an entity which he certainly has a good case.

The defendant in the criminal case makes himself vulnerable in the criminal action by filing a lawsuit. As plaintiff, he cannot hide behind self-incrimination.

 

[NIV]

Correct, but not on one thing. The guy was the defendant in the robbery. The guy is trying to file a suit against an entity which he certainly has a good case.

I was starting to write, but all I can think of is the defendant allegedly attempting a robbery and his pistol misfires because of some product defect in the weapon and he wants to testify in regards to his damages without having the testimony being used against him. Then I thought of National Abortion Federation v. Center for Medical Process and believe this might be homework with basic facts changed.

 

[pditty8811]

The defendant in the criminal case makes himself vulnerable in the criminal action by filing a lawsuit. As plaintiff, he cannot hide behind self-incrimination.

As plaintiff in the civil case he can't hide behind self-incrimination. But, he would still be able to hide against self-incrimination if the criminal case were to reopen, and the prosecutor sought to use testimony in civil case as evidence?

 

[pditty8811]

I was starting to write, but all I can think of is the defendant allegedly attempting a robbery and his pistol misfires because of some product defect in the weapon and he wants to testify in regards to his damages without having the testimony being used against him. Then I thought of National Abortion Federation v. Center for Medical Process and believe this might be homework with basic facts changed.

Hi NIV, thanks for your reply. Robbery was an example used here.

 

[CTU]

I trust the OP - the "legal adviser" - is going to treat the kind folk here with a bit more grace than in previous threads?

Good, good. Just making sure.