RULE 611. MODE AND ORDER OF
INTERROGATION AND PRESENTATION
EXAMINING WITNESSES AND PRESENTING EVIDENCE
(a) Control by court. The
court shall exercise reasonable control over the mode and order
of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to (1) make the interrogation and
presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth, (2) avoid needless consumption of
time, and (3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue
(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 be limited to the subject matter
of the direct examination and matters affecting the credibility of the witness. The court, in
the exercise of discretion, may permit inquiry into additional matters as if on direct
(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 the direct examination of
a witness except as may be necessary to develop the witness' testimony. Ordinarily, leading
questions should be permitted on cross-examination. Whenever a party calls a hostile
witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party, interrogation may
be by leading questions.
(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.
Rule 610 was amended, effective March 1, 1990; _____________.
Rule 611 is substantially the same as
Rule Fed.R.Ev. 611 of the Federal Rules of
The rule gives the court wide discretion over the mode and order of presenting evidence.
This comports with established North Dakota case law. See Killmer v. Duchscherer,
N.W.2d 650 (N.D. 1955).
The trial judge may allow a
child witness to use an anatomically correct doll if a proper
foundation is laid. The doll may not be used in a suggestive manner and the nonverbal
testimony must be relevant. See, State v. Jenkins, 326 N.W.2d 67 (N.D.
Subdivision (c) was amended, effective March 1, 1990. The amendment is technical in nature and no substantive change is intended.
Rule 611 was amended, effective ______________, in response to the December 1, 2011, revision of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.
Sources: Joint Procedure Committee
: of___________________; March 24-25,
1988, page 12; December 3, 1987, pages 15-16; May 21-22, 1987, pages 18-19; February
19-20, 1987, pages 10-12; June 3, 1976, page 2; October 1, 1975, page 6.
611 , Federal Rules of Evidence; Rule 611, SBAND
Considered: N.D.C.C. §§ 31-04-01, 31-04-04, 31-04-05.
Considered: Rules 30, 31, 32,
Cross Reference: N.D.R.Civ.P. 30 (Depositions by Oral Examination), N.D.R.Civ.P. 31 (Depositions by Written Questions), N.D.R.Civ.P. 43 (Evidence).