We are taught to ask short questions on cross examination. In fact, some proponents of certain styles of cross examination proclaim that you can cross with one word, eg, “green”. 

Q: the car was a foreign make? 

A: yes. 

Q: with 4 doors? 

A: yes. 

Q: not white? 

A: correct. 

Q: not black? 

A: correct. 

Q: green?

A: yes. 

But sometimes longer questions are necessary or preferable.  This is particularly true where you are “looping”.  Looping is the repetition of a favorable fact in successive questions.  It reinforces the fact and even ties it to new facts.  Looping makes questions longer, but ties the positive fact to a new fact.  Here is an example of my looping favorable testimony in a case where I’m challenging a pat down:  

  
“Not knowing what [he] had is not a sufficient basis to conduct a pat down.”  By looping this fact into successive questions, I reinforced the unlawful basis for the pat down.