Childers v. Commonwealth
Kentucky Supreme Court
1DissentVenters, J.
We respectfully disagree with the Majority’s conclusion that cross-examination of a witness under KRE 608(b) is restricted by KRE 609, and, therefore, we dissent. The Majority holds that KRE 608(b) forbids the cross-examination of a witness about a specific instance of dishonest conduct when that conduct resulted in a criminal conviction, but allows such cross-examination when the subject of the inquiry was not convicted of a crime arising from such conduct. We dissent from the majority’s interpretation of KRE 608(b) because it is contrary to the plain meaning of the rule; offends the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Carmelita Elcock v. Kmart CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Virginia Hurst (90-6235) Sam T. Burnett (90-6448) and Eddie E. Shutt (90-6254)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
- United States v. WilkersonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
- United States v. BarnhartCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
- Baker v. KammererKentucky Supreme Court · 2006
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.