Concepts Flashcards
Relevance
Evidence is relevant if it
1) has a tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence, and
2) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.
Probative
- Under Rule 401, the item of evidence has probative value if it has any
- tendency to prove or disprove a proposition of fact
(i.e., any tendency to make the existence of any fact more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence (FRE 401).
Materiality
- Under Rule 401, evidence is material if what it proves or disproves is of consequence.
- Wide range of facts and matters can be considered of consequence whether they pertain to an issue of legal relevance or background information.
Prejudice
- A forejudgement
- Bias
- Preconceived notion
- A leaning towards one side of a cause for some reason other than a conviction of its justice.
- (unfair) An undue tendency to suggest decisions on an improper basis
403 exclusion
A court may exclude otherwise relevant evidence if under 403 its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of:
1) unfair prejudice,
2) confusing the issues,
3) misleading the jury, OR
4) undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
UP-Co-MUD-WaN
Logical relevance FRE
Evidence is logically relevant when it
- tends to make any fact of consequence
- more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and
- the fact is of consequence in determining the action.
Logical relevance (CEC 210)
- Relevant evidence means evidence,
- including evidence relevant to the credibility of a witness or hearsay declarant,
- having any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to determination of the action.
Legal relevance
- Logically relevant evidence may still be excluded if
- its probative value is substantially outweighed by
- a danger of unfair prejudice,
- confusing the issues,
- misleading the jury,
- undue delay, wasting time, or being needlessly cumulative.
Applies to both federal and CA courts.
Prior Crimes or Other Bad Acts – FRE 404(b)
- Character evidence in the form of specific acts of prior crimes or other bad acts are admissible to show a secondary purpose, such as
- Knowledge, Intent, Scheme,
- Motive, Opportunity, Mistake or absence of accident,
- Preparation, Identity, or Plan
(KIS MOM PIP)
- Motive
- Intent
- absence of Mistake
- Identity or
- Common scheme or plan
(MIMIC)
Character evidence (general rule)
- Evidence may not be used to prove that a person acted in
- conformity with his propensity
- on the occasion in question.
In other words, evidence of character (i.e., propensity to act in a certain way) may not be used as circumstantial evidence of conduct
FRE 404(a)
“Evidence of a person’s character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait.”
2-step approach to analyzing admissibility of character evidence
- Analyze the purpose
- If it is admissible, identify proper “type” of character evidence being offered
Purposes for which character evidence is offered
- To show character where character is at issue (admissible)
- To show probable past conduct in conformity with character (inadmissible)
- To impeach (see impeachment rules)
Types of character evidence
- Specific instances of conduct
- Opinion (e.g., based on observation of an acquaintance)
- Reputation (in the community)
Exceptions to FRE 404(a)
- D opens the door in criminal case
- V’s exception (subject to 412)
- Credibility (see cross-exam)
- 1994 Violent Crime Control Act
- CEC §1108/1109
- Caveat: other crimes, wrongs, or acts
