Two years after the accident, another doctor diagnosed plaintiff with fibrocystic disease in the breast and surgery was performed. That doctor wrote an opinion letter to the effect that he doubted whether the fibrocystic disease was related to the accident. Prior to the trial the court ruled that the breast surgery should not be put into evidence, but that the original treatment and the mammogram was admissible. The plaintiff testified and did not, on direct examination, mention the breast surgery, but did testify that she complained of injury to her breast after the accident and that the doctor sent her for a mammogram. On cross-examination the defense attorney, under the theory of impeaching the plaintiff, was allowed to introduce the opinion letter of the specialist.
Defendant is on trial for illegal possession and sale of cocaine.
The defense is that X planted cocaine on defendant because X was dating defendant's sister and defendant objected to the relationship. Defendant will testify that he knew X was an undercover policeman, and that he had on several occasions refused X's request to get drugs. Before the trial, defendant moves for an order prohibiting the prosecution from employing three previous convictions to impeach. B. Assume that defendant testifies. Defendant is charged with deviant sexual activity with a child.