State v. Kouzounas

Convicted of arson, the respondent presents exceptions relating to the admissibility of certain rebuttal testimony by the State. He had denied in cross-examination that following his arrest he went to Portland for the purpose of consulting counsel with one Nadeau, who had so testified for the State. It was permitted to rebut this denial by the evidence of the consulted attorney.

The contention is that the cross-examiner elicited a collateral fact binding upon the State without right of contradiction.

“It is true that a witness cannot be cross-examined on collateral matters for the purpose of…