Yes, they can. Typically a defense attorney will subpoena the witness, but the attorney may request that the court order the witness to remain in the court after testifying for the state. This assumes there is evidence the witness has to offer that cannot be brought out on cross examination of them for some reason. The better practice is to issue a subpoena.
The defense can call a prosecution witness whether the prosecution calls them to testify or not. The defense may subpoena anyone who can provide exculpatory evidence to appear and testify under oath, without exception.
Yes. But, the defense attorney would have to remove him/her self as the defense attorney
It would be VERY unusual but there could be circumstances when a judge might order an attorney involved in a case to take the stand in oredr to question him.
Direct examination is when the witness is FIRST questioned in court by an attorney (usually their own lawyer), when he is questioned by the opposing side it is called "cross-examination."
The attorney who calls the witness conducts a direct examination. The opposing attorney may then conduct a cross examination. The first attorney may then conduct a redirect exam, whereupon the opposing attorney may conduct a recross exam.
Examination of a witness by opposing counsel is called cross-examination, assuming that by "opposing counsel" you mean examining a witness that is testifying against the client of the opposing counsel. Examination by either counsel of witnesses in favor of their client's position is called direct examination.
Direct examination is when the witness is FIRST questioned in court by an attorney (usually their own lawyer), when he is questioned by the opposing side it is called "cross-examination."
When an attorney determines that the opposing counsel (or witness) has made, or is about to make, a statement or revelation which is contrary to established law and/or legal procedure. The judge rules on the objection by saying either "sustained", which means he agrees with the attorney who made the objection, and the opposing council must drop that line of questioning, or he says "overruled" or "I will allow it", which means he disagrees - for the moment - with the attorney who made the objection, and the opposing council can continue.
Redirect exam testimony refers to the process in which an attorney asks follow-up questions to a witness after cross-examination by the opposing attorney. The purpose is to clarify or correct any points that may have been raised during cross-examination, and to further support the witness's credibility and the case's narrative.
Generally, no, except that an attorney cannot examine the witness again after the opposing attorney has declined (for example, if I finish a re-direct, you choose not to re-cross, I can't then do another re-direct anyway).
Any one can serve as a witness to a will. The fact that they are an attorney makes no difference.
Redirect examination is when an attorney asks follow-up questions to a witness after the opposing attorney has completed their cross-examination. The purpose is to clarify any points raised during cross-examination and to reinforce the witness's credibility or testimony. It is limited to addressing issues raised during cross-examination and cannot introduce new topics.
In a trial:a lawyer presents a witness to give directtestimony.The opposing lawyer then cross examines the witness (to minimize the effect of the witness).The original lawyer can redirect (possibly to reaffirm the witnesses original testimony.The opposing lawyer may try to recross the witness again.
It's known as "collusion"
The attorney asked several questions of the witnes.