Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Legal Study > California Evidence > Flashcards

California Evidence Flashcards

1
Q

Generally, evidence must have these four components to be admissible.

A

In court, the evidence:

  1. Must be relevant
  2. Must be authenticated
  3. Must not be inadmissible hearsay
  4. Must withstand a “best evidence” objection
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Only ___________ evidence is admissible.

EC:

A

Relevant

EC 350

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

To be relevant, evidence must have ________________?

EC:

A

A tendency to prove or disprove any disputed fact, including credibility.
EC 210

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

All relevant evidence is admissible, except _____________?

EC:

A

As provided by statute.

EC 351

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

To authenticate evidence, you must do what?

EC:

A 
Introduce sufficient evidence to sustain a finding that the evidence is what you say it is. 
EC 1400(a)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Is the originator of a document required to testify as to its authenticity?
EC:

A

No.

EC 1411

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Authentication does not involve the ____________ of the document’s contents, rather only _________________________?
Case Law

A

Truth.
Whether the document is what it is claimed to be.
City of Vista v. Sutro & Co. (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 411-412.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Printouts of digital data are presumed to be ____________________.

A

Accurate representations of the data.

EC 1552, 1553

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Which evidence code section allows you to authenticate evidence by calling a witness who saw the document prepared?

A

EC 1413

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Which evidence code section allows you to authenticate evidence by introducing an expert handwriting comparison?

A

EC 1415

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Which evidence code section allows you to authenticate evidence by asking a lay witness who is familiar with the writer’s handwriting to identify the handwriting?

A

EC 1516

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Which evidence code section allows you to authenticate evidence by asking the finder of fact to compare the handwriting on the document to a known exemplar?

A

EC 1470

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Which evidence code section allows you to authenticate evidence by showing the writing refers to matters that only the writer would have been aware?

A

EC 1421

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Which evidence code sections allows you to authenticate evidence using various presumptions to authenticate official records with an official seal or signature?

A

EC 1450-1454

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

There is a presumption that official signatures are ________________?
EC:

A

Genuine.

EC 1530, 1453

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Which evidence code section allows you to authenticate evidence by any other means not found in the evidence code that will sustain a finding that the evidence is what you say it is?
Case Law:

A

EC 1410

People v. Olguin (1994) 31 Cal.App.4th 1355

17
Q

Hearsay evidence is evidence of ____________________________

EC:

A 
A statement that was made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated. 
EC 1200(a)
18
Q

Hearsay evidence is inadmissible, except _____________?

EC:

A 
As provided by law.
EC 1200(b)
19
Q

A statement within the scope of a hearsay exception is admissible so long as ___________.
EC:

A

Each statement meets the requirements of an exception to the hearsay rule.
EC 1201

20
Q

Evidence of a statement by a declarant that is inconsistent with a statement of the declarant is admissible for ____________.
EC

A

The purposes of attacking the credibility of the declarant.

EC 1202

21
Q

The declarant of a statement that is admitted as hearsay evidence may be called and examined by _______________
EC

A

Any adverse party as if under cross-examination concerning the statement.
EC 1203

22
Q

Party Admission
Hearsay is admissible when a hearsay statement is offered against the declarant in an action to which _____________?
EC:

A

The person is a party in either his individual or representative capacity, regardless of whether the statement was made in his individual or representative capacity.
EC 1220

23
Q

Hearsay is admissible as an adoptive admission when the statement is _________?
EC:

A

One of which the party, with knowledge of the content thereof, has by words or other conduct manifested his adoption or belief in its truth.
EC 1221

24
Q

Hearsay statement is admissible as an authorized admission if ________________?
EC:

A

The statement was made by a person authorized by the party to make the statement and the evidence is offered after the admission of evidence sufficient to sustain a finding that the party making the statement had the authority to make such a statement.
EC 1222

25
Q

When a party’s liability is based on the liability of a declarant, evidence of a statement by the declarant is admissible __________?
EC:

A

Against the party as it would be if offered against the declarant.
EC 1224

26
Q

Declaration against Interest
Evidence of a statement by a declarant having sufficient knowledge of the subject is admissible if _______________?
EC:

A

The declarant is unavailable as a witness and the statement was so far contrary to the declarant interest or creat

27
Q

Prior inconsistent statements

EC:

A

A hearsay statement is admissible if it is inconsistent with the testimony presently being offered.
EC 1235

28
Q

Prior Consistent Statement

EC:

A

A hearsay statement is admissible if the statement is consistent with the testimony being presently offered.
EC 1236

29
Q

Pas Recollection Recorded

EC:

A

A hearsay statement is admissible if it would have been admissible as testimony, if the witness has insufficient recollection of the statement and the statement was contained in a writing that was made at the time when the recorded fact occurred, was made by the witness or under his direction, is offered after the witness testifies the statement is true, and the writing is authenticated. The statement may then be read into evidence but the writing may not be received unless offered by an adverse party.
EC 1237

30
Q

Prior Identification

EC:

A

A hearsay statement is admissible if it would have been admissible as testimony, the statement is the identification of a person related to the occurrence, the statement was made at the time of the occurrence or while fresh in memory, the statement is offered after the witness testifies that he made the identification and that it was a true reflection of his opinion at that time.
EC 1238

31
Q

Spontaneous Statement

EC:

A

A hearsay statement is admissible if it purports to narrate, describe, or explain an even perceived by the declarant and it was made spontaneously while the declarant was under the stress of excitement cause by such perception.
EC 1240

Legal Study (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions