NARRATIVE (D)
FRE 611 (a)
This objection should be used when the examining attorney asks a question that prompts the witness to tell a long, uncontrolled story.
Examples
- “Mrs. Lincoln, tell us everything you know.”
- “In your own words, please tell us what happened that day.”
- “Ms. Keene, tell us everything you know about this case.”
- “Can you please tell the jury everything that happened, starting from the beginning?”
FRE 611
(a) Control by the Court; Purposes. The court should exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of examining witnesses and presenting evidence so as to:
(1) make those procedures effective for determining the truth;
(2) avoid wasting time; and
(3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
(b) Scope of Cross-Examination. Cross-examination should not go beyond the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the witness's credibility. The court may allow inquiry into additional matters as if on direct examination.
(c) Leading Questions. Leading questions should not be used on direct examination except as necessary to develop the witness's testimony. Ordinarily, the court should allow leading questions:
(1) on cross-examination; and
(2) when a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party.
Summary
Rule 611 deals generally with the scope of a trial judge's authority to exercise reasonable control over the trial proceedings, including the mode of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence. The rule contemplates flexibility and discretion so that the truth will be ascertained and the interests of the public and the parties promoted. In short, the three main objectives of Rule 611 are to discover the truth in an efficient manner, avoid wasting time, and protect the witnesses from improper examination questions.
Possible Objections under Rule 611: Argumentative, Compound, Narrative, Leading, Mischaracterization, Nonresponsive, Asked & Answered, Vague, Assumes Facts not in Evidence
Case Law (Narrative)
- U.S. v. Beckton, 740 F.3d 303 (4th Cir. 2014) (defendant, as a pro se litigant, was not permitted to testify in narrative form)
- U.S. v. Gallagher, 99 F.3d 329 (9th Cir. 1996) (no abuse of discretion in restricting defendant's right to testify when defendant attempted to testify in narrative form)
- U.S. v. Young, 745 F.2d 733 (2d Cir. 1984) (trial judge has broad discretion in deciding whether or not to allow narrative testimony)