Padilla v. State
Supreme Court of Wyoming
601 P.2d 189 (Wyo. 1979)
Padilla (defendant) was charged with sexual assault. On cross-examination of the victim, Padilla began asking the victim about her testimony in the preliminary hearing, specifically her testimony regarding whether she previously knew Padilla. The prosecution objected, arguing that a transcript of the hearing should be used. Padilla stated that a transcript did not exist. The trial court sustained the objection and Padilla made no further reference to the issue. The trial court convicted Padilla. Padilla appealed, arguing that the objection should not have been sustained because the question itself was enough to establish Padilla’s goal of impeaching the witness.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Rooney, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 726,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 726,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,700 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.