Conn. R. Evid. 6-4
The credibility of a witness may be impeached by any party, including the party calling the witness, unless the court determines that a party's impeachment of its own witness is primarily for the purpose of introducing otherwise inadmissible evidence.
Conn. Code. Evid. 6-4
COMMENTARY
Section 6-4 reflects the rule announced in State v. Graham, 200 Conn. 9, 17-18, 509 A.2d 493 (1986). In Graham, the Supreme Court abandoned the common-law ''voucher'' rule; id., 17; which provided that a party could not impeach its own witness except upon a showing of surprise, hostility or adversity, or when the court permitted impeachment in situations in which a witness' in-court testimony was inconsistent with his or her prior out-of-court statements. See, e.g., State v. McCarthy, 197 Conn. 166, 177, 496 A.2d 190 (1985); Schmeltz v. Tracy, 119 Conn. 492, 498, 177 A. 520 (1935).
In Graham and subsequent decisions; e.g., State v. Williams, 204 Conn. 523, 531, 529 A.2d 653 (1987); State v. Jasper, 200 Conn. 30, 34, 508 A.2d 1387 (1986); the court has supplied a two-pronged test for determining whether impeachment serves as a mere subterfuge for introducing substantively inadmissible evidence. A party's impeachment of a witness it calls by using the witness' prior inconsistent statements is improper when: (1) the primary purpose of calling the witness is to impeach the witness; and (2) the party introduces the statement in hope that the jury will use it substantively. E.g., State v. Graham, supra, 200 Conn. 18. The court in Graham instructed trial courts to prohibit impeachment when both prongs are met. Id. Note, however, that if the prior inconsistent statement is substantively admissible under State v. Whelan, 200 Conn. 743, 753, 513 A.2d 86, cert. denied, 479 U.S. 994, 107 S. Ct. 597, 93 L. Ed. 2d 598 (1986); see Section 8-5(1); or under any other exceptions to the hearsay rule, the limitation on impeachment will not apply because impeachment with the prior inconsistent statement cannot result in introducing otherwise inadmissible evidence. Cf. State v. Whelan, supra, 753 n.8.
Section 6-4 applies to all parties in both criminal and civil cases and applies to all methods of impeachment authorized by the Code.