Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Mullins

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 5, 1995No. 03094Published

1DissentCirillo, Judge

I respectfully dissent. While I believe that a witness may be cross-examined as to matters tending to show interest or bias, in cases where the witness subject to cross-examination is also the victim, that victim should be treated differently from the ordinary witness. I, therefore, disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the trial court erred in precluding appellant from challenging the self-interest of the victim.

The liberalization of cross-examining witnesses creates a chilling effect on any victim of crime coming forth to testify. Mr. Demps was the victim in this case, and yet the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. EvansSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. Commonwealth v. CoadesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  3. Commonwealth v. RossSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  4. Commonwealth v. JoinesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Commonwealth v. WarrenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API