Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

 District courts have 'broad discretion in determining the competency of a witness to testify, and [their] decisions will not be reversed in the absence of an abuse of discretion.' United States v. Gomez, 807 F.2d 1523, 1527 (10th Cir. 1986).

The competency of witnesses to testify in federal criminal trials is governed by Fed. R. Evid. 601. See United States v. Haro, 573 F.2d 661, 667 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 851, 58 L. Ed. 2d 155, 99 S. Ct. 156 (1978). Rule 601 establishes a presumption 'every person is competent to be a witness.' Fed. R. Evid. 601. This means there is no minimum or baseline mental capacity requirements witnesses must demonstrate before testifying. See Fed. R. Evid. 601 advisory committee's note. Indeed, the drafters of Rule 601 considered mental capacity not to be a question of competence, but to be a question 'particularly suited to the [trier of fact] as one of weight and credibility.' Id.

In addition to the general presumption of competency found in Rule 601, there is a specific statutory presumption children [The statute applies only to children who have been '[a] victim of a crime of physical ...

Register or login to access full content