 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Molnar v. Malcolm Mark Law6/8/1989
1987 Repl. Vol. 6A); People v. Chavez, 621 P.2d 1362 (Colo. 1981), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1028, 101 S. Ct. 3019, 69 L. Ed. 2d 398 (1981). Moreover, the trial court does not have the discretion to foreclose the use of a witness' prior felony conviction for impeachment purposes. People v. Velarde, 196 Colo. 254, 586 P.2d 6 (1978).
Plaintiff complains because defendant offered the testimony to rebut the plaintiff's claim for lost income rather than to attack his credibility. However, the court concluded that the conviction was admissible under § 13-90-101 for credibility purposes. And, in light of the special verdict returned by the jury, there 'vas no opportunity for the jury to consider it for the other purpose for which it was offered.
IV.
Finally, since the requirements of § 13-80-119 were satisfied, the court did not abuse its discretion in granting attorney fees to defendant pursuant to that statute.
The judgment is affirmed.
JUDGE PIERCE and JUDGE REED concur.
|