2010 US Code
Title 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
TITLE 28 - APPENDIX
FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE
Rule 605 - Competency of Judge as Witness
View MetadataPublication Title | United States Code, 2006 Edition, Supplement 4, Title 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE |
Category | Bills and Statutes |
Collection | United States Code |
SuDoc Class Number | Y 1.2/5: |
Contained Within | Title 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE TITLE 28 - APPENDIX FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE ARTICLE VI. WITNESSES Rule 605 - Competency of Judge as Witness |
Contains | rule 605 |
Date | 2010 |
Laws in Effect as of Date | January 7, 2011 |
Positive Law | Yes |
Disposition | standard |
Source Credit | Pub. L. 93-595, §1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1934. |
Statutes at Large Reference | 88 Stat. 1934 |
Public Law Reference | Public Law 93-595 |
Rule 605. Competency of Judge as Witness
The judge presiding at the trial may not testify in that trial as a witness. No objection need be made in order to preserve the point.
(Pub. L. 93–595, §1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1934.)
Notes of Advisory Committee on Proposed RulesIn view of the mandate of 28 U.S.C. §455 that a judge disqualify himself in “any case in which he * * * is or has been a material witness,” the likelihood that the presiding judge in a federal court might be called to testify in the trial over which he is presiding is slight. Nevertheless the possibility is not totally eliminated.
The solution here presented is a broad rule of incompetency, rather than such alternatives as incompetency only as to material matters, leaving the matter to the discretion of the judge, or recognizing no incompetency. The choice is the result of inability to evolve satisfactory answers to questions which arise when the judge abandons the bench for the witness stand. Who rules on objections? Who compels him to answer? Can he rule impartially on the weight and admissibility of his own testimony? Can he be impeached or cross-examined effectively? Can he, in a jury trial, avoid conferring his seal of approval on one side in the eyes of the jury? Can he, in a bench trial, avoid an involvement destructive of impartiality? The rule of general incompetency has substantial support. See Report of the Special Committee on the Propriety of Judges Appearing as Witnesses, 36 A.B.A.J. 630 (1950); cases collected in Annot. 157 A.L.R. 311; McCormick §68, p. 147; Uniform Rule 42; California Evidence Code §703; Kansas Code of Civil Procedure §60–442; New Jersey Evidence Rule 42. Cf. 6 Wigmore §1909, which advocates leaving the matter to the discretion of the judge, and statutes to that effect collected in Annot. 157 A.L.R. 311.
The rule provides an “automatic” objection. To require an actual objection would confront the opponent with a choice between not objecting, with the result of allowing the testimony, and objecting, with the probable result of excluding the testimony but at the price of continuing the trial before a judge likely to feel that his integrity had been attacked by the objector.
Disclaimer: These codes may not be the most recent version. The United States Government Printing Office may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the US site. Please check official sources.