Finch v. Weiner page 367 o Thinking in terms of categories type fact and specific fact (killing someone vs.

. stabbing someone) Rules of law are like that and the Finch case deals with the scope of examination Necessary witness A fact statement which is essential to make prima facie case, making that person necessary witness In Finch the truck driver is a necessary witness o P is allowed to call D, but they are hostile and they can lead The information you need from truck driver, he was operating truck in scope of employment This is where the idea of case and the rule of law of case can lead to confusion o Court takes about scope of Skinners attorney cross examined him bringing out why the accident was not his fault. D was called as D witness The story was told twice D won and P said not fair So they claim that permitting the D to ask about accident was beyond the scope of cross This case deals with the scope of cross with a necessary witness So it is specific case P had to call this guy, and so to have to do this twice is not allowed o Per Finch v. Weiner, although the judge has discretion under Rule 611(c) to control the order of the proof, departure from the regular order of proof will not be permitted where it will cause any injustice to either party. In Finch, the defendant basically got to question the same witness twice on the same line of questioning-made his case twice with the same witness. This was deemed impermissible. o Rule 612. Writing Used to Refresh Memory Except as otherwise provided in criminal proceedings by section 3500 of title 18, United States Code, if a witness uses a writing to refresh memory for the purpose of testifying, either- (1) while testifying, or (2) before testifying, if the court in its discretion determines it is necessary in the interests of justice, o an adverse party is entitled to have the writing produced at the hearing, to inspect it, to cross-examine the witness thereon, and to introduce in evidence those portions which relate to the testimony of the witness. If it is claimed that the writing contains matters not related to the subject matter of the testimony the court shall examine the writing in camera, excise any portions not so related, and order delivery of the remainder to the party entitled thereto. Any portion withheld over objections shall be preserved and made available to the appellate court in the event of an appeal. If a writing is not produced or delivered pursuant to order under this rule, the court shall make any order justice requires, except that in criminal cases when the prosecution elects not to comply, the order shall be one striking the testimony or, if the court in its discretion determines that the interests of justice so require, declaring a mistrial.