of blocks forming steps that enable people to scale it, the Patagonia Lake wall is not scalable and is cordoned off. In light of these factors, we conclude that the ADOT memo was irrelevant and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding it. B. The Trial Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion In Admitting The Notice Of Claim For The Purpose Of Impeaching Hernandez. ¶ 8 Hernandez next protests the admission of his notice of claim for the purpose of impeaching his trial testimony. According to the notice of claim: At about, 8:30 p.m. Mr. Hernandez was walking on a trail leading to the lake marina. As Mr. Hernandez and Michael followed the trail, Mr. Hernandez stepped forward, believing he was on the trail, fell off a cliff, and fell app 45, 594 P.2d 1039, 1041 (App.1979) (<HOLDING>). Because a party’s credi bility is always
holding that insureds sons prior inconsistent statements impeached his more recent claim that he acted accidentally holding that on direct examination of defendant he is entitled to explain the nature and circumstances of his prior conviction in order to rehabilitate himself prior to being impeached by the state during crossexamination holding that witness could not be impeached with prior statement because his silence did not constitute testimony  holding without discussion of montgomery that a defendant can only be impeached by evidence of a conviction of a prior felony or infamous crime holding that counsel was ineffective for inter alia failing to impeach a witness with prior inconsistent statements