holding Texas Rule of Criminal Evidence 610(b), per mitting cross-examination on any matter relevant to credibility, allows for impeachment on a collateral matter when relevant to a witness' credibility by contradicting witness’ testimony
How later courts described this case
- holding Texas Rule of Criminal Evidence 610(b), per mitting cross-examination on any matter relevant to credibility, allows for impeachment on a collateral matter when relevant to a witness' credibility by contradicting witness’ testimony
- district court denied application of fire protection activities exemption where it found that nonexempt ”[t]ime spent responding to, returning from, or completing paperwork on medical calls or accidents other than car accidents, and time devoted to emergency medical training or study related to emergency medical services” exceeded 20% of total work hours
- On "a question of federal law, we are bound by the pertinent decisions of the United States Supreme Court."
- "`If earlier and later statutes are in irreconcilable conflict, then the earlier must yield to the later by implied repeal.'" (Quoting Anthony et al. v. Veatch et al., 189 Or. 462, 481, 220 P.2d 493 (1950).)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
This record has no opinion text. It is a disposition such as a denial of certiorari, kept so the case can be found by name and citation.