Opinion ID: 2374322
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Exclusion of Deposition of Unavailable Witness for Impeachment Purposes

Text: During this same chambers conference, defense counsel sought a ruling on whether she would be allowed to impeach Laverriere's trial testimony by using a deposition which had been taken before the first trial. After defense counsel made an offer of proof, the presiding justice ruled that the deposition was inadmissible because the subsequent testimony from the first trial was later in time and because defense counsel had an opportunity to use the deposition in the first trial and had not done so. Rule 15(e) of the Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure governs the use of a deposition at a criminal trial. That rule specifically states [a]ny deposition may also be used by any party for the purpose of contradicting or impeaching the testimony of the deponent as a witness. M.R.Crim.P. 15(e). As a general principle, an absentee witness whose testimony is admitted in the form of prior testimony, may be impeached in the same manner as if the witness were present and testifying. See 3A J. Wigmore, supra, § 888, at 652. We conclude, therefore, that the presiding justice committed error by ruling that the deposition was inadmissible for impeachment purposes. Because we are vacating the conviction on the other grounds, we need not decide whether the error discussed in part IV constitutes prejudicial error. Finally, in view of the disposition we make of this case, we consider it unnecessary to discuss the other issues raised on appeal. The entry is: Judgment vacated. Remanded for further proceeding consistent with this opinion. All concurring.