Preview:

May 26, 2000

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

No. 99-K-1569 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. FIDELIS OWUNTA

On Writ of Certiorari to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal

PER CURIAM:* Louisiana has long sanctioned the impeachment of a witness in criminal trials by his or her prior inconsistent statements. La.C.E. art. 607(D)(2); former La.R.S. 15:493;

State v. Gabriel, 450 So.2d 611, 616 (La. 1984); State v. Mosley, 360 So.2d 844, 845 (La. 1978); State v. Randolf, 332 so.2d 806, 813 (La. 1976). Provided that the witness has had

a fair opportunity "to admit the fact and has failed distinctly to do so," La.C.E. art. 613, extrinsic evidence of the statement is admissible, not to prove the truth of the matter asserted, i.e., not for its hearsay content, but to establish the fact of contradiction as a means of impeaching witness's general credibility. State v. Cousin, 96-2973, p. 8 In this regard,

(La. 4/14/98), 710 So.2d 1065, 1069.

Louisiana has followed the minority rule that such prior inconsistent statements "simply do not constitute substantive evidence." State v. Allien, 366 So.2d 1308, 131l (La. 1978);

cf. California v. Green, 399 U.S. 149, 164, 90 S.Ct. 1930, 1938, 26 L.Ed.2d 489 (1970)("[T]here is little difference as Victory, J., not on panel. II,

Download 1999-K-1569 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. FIDELIS OWUNTA.pdf

Louisiana Law