Evidence Flashcards

1
Q

juror testify?

A

A juror cannot testify as to the mental processes that he or any other juror used in arriving at a verdict, even when those mental processes reflect a misunderstanding of the law.

the limitation on a juror testifying as a witness before the other jurors only applies during the trial, and not after it has concluded.

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

Extrinsic evidence of the prior inconsistent statement ?

A

Extrinsic evidence of the prior inconsistent statement used to impeach a witness’s credibility may be admitted only if the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement and the opposing party is given the opportunity to examine the witness about it.

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

Hearsay- exception of exception

A

The officer’s notes are not admissible under the hearsay exception for public records under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8) because the rule specifically exempts statements by law enforcement personnel when offered in a criminal case.

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

Dead Man’s Statute evidence

A

A dead man’s statute, also known as a dead man act or dead man’s rule, is a statute designed to prevent perjury in a civil case by prohibiting a witness who is an interested party from testifying about communications or transactions with a deceased person (a “decedent”) against the decedent unless there is a waiver.

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

Authentication of reproductions (e.g., photographs, diagrams, maps, movies) + witnesses with a personal knowledge of the reproduction (anyone)

A

All tangible evidence must be authenticated. To authenticate an item, the proponent must produce sufficient evidence to support a finding that the thing is what its proponent claims it is. When reproductions (e.g., photographs, diagrams, maps, movies) are introduced into evidence, they may be authenticated by the testimony of a witness with personal knowledge that the object accurately depicts what its proponent claims it does.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

exclusion of a witness from the courtroom

A

At a party’s request, the court must order the exclusion of a witness from the courtroom so that the party cannot hear the testimony of the other witnesses, unless an exception applies.

There is an exception for an officer or employee of a party who is not a natural person, and this exception has frequently been applied to the police officer in charge of investigating a criminal case.

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

Character evidence

A

Evidence of a person’s character (or character trait) generally is inadmissible to prove that the person acted in accordance with that character (or character trait) on a particular occasion. Character evidence is admissible if it is an essential element of a claim, such as in the case of negligent hiring, child molestation etc.

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

A statement offered as circumstantial evidence of the declarant’s mental state is admissible as nonhearsay

A

A statement offered as circumstantial evidence of the declarant’s mental state is admissible as nonhearsay

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

A specific instance of conduct, if used to impeach the credibility of a testifying witness, may not be proved by the introduction of extrinsic evidence.

A

A specific instance of conduct, if used to impeach the credibility of a testifying witness, may not be proved by the introduction of extrinsic evidence.

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

Even though a judge has decided that evidence, such as a confession, is admissible, a party may nevertheless introduce other evidence that is relevant to the weight and credibility of the admitted evidence.

A

Even though a judge has decided that evidence, such as a confession, is admissible, a party may nevertheless introduce other evidence that is relevant to the weight and credibility of the admitted evidence.

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

When the relevance of evidence depends upon whether a fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist. The court may admit the proposed evidence on the condition that the proof be introduced later.

A

When the relevance of evidence depends upon whether a fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist. The court may admit the proposed evidence on the condition that the proof be introduced later.

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

homicide- dying declaration hearsay is ok
if it’s a civil case- dying declaration hearsay is ok

but if it’s an attempted murder trial in crim case- not admissible as dying declaration hearsay only HOMICIDE

A

A dying declaration only qualifies as a hearsay exception if (i) the statement is made by an individual who believes she is dying, (ii) the individual believes that her death is imminent, and (iii) the statement pertains to the cause or circumstance of her death

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

witness’s juvenile adjudication

A

A criminal defendant may impeach a witness by introducing evidence of a witness’s juvenile adjudication to show motive to lie or bias. (Note: A criminal defendant may also impeach a witness’s character for truthfulness with the witness’s juvenile adjudication when an adult’s conviction for the offense would be admissible to attack the adult’s credibility and admitting the evidence is necessary to fairly determine guilt or innocence.

Defendant in a criminal case who testifies on his own behalf may not be impeached by a juvenile adjudication to show that the defendant is untruthful.

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

When, on cross-examination, a witness denies a specific instance of conduct, extrinsic evidence is not admissible

A

When, on cross-examination, a witness denies a specific instance of conduct, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to prove that instance in order to attack or support the witness’s character for truthfulness. This prohibition also bars references to any consequences that a witness may have suffered because of the conduct, except for criminal convictions.

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

In determining a preliminary question, such as the existence of a privilege, although the court is not generally bound by the rules of evidence, the court cannot consider privileged evidence.

A

In determining a preliminary question, such as the existence of a privilege, although the court is not generally bound by the rules of evidence, the court cannot consider privileged evidence.

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

In a civil case, the court must instruct the jury that a fact that has been judicially noticed must be accepted as conclusive.

A

In a civil case, the court must instruct the jury that a fact that has been judicially noticed must be accepted as conclusive.

17
Q

Although the general rule of spousal immunity (one of the two “spousal privileges”) is that the spouse of a criminal defendant may not be called as a witness by the prosecution, and one spouse cannot be compelled to testify against the other in a criminal trial, the rule is different in federal court. In federal court, the witness spouse holds this privilege, and may choose to testify; the defendant spouse cannot prevent her from doing so by claiming the privilege. (Note that the rule is different for the “confidential marital communications” privilege—the other half of the “spousal privilege.” The confidential marital communications privilege prevents either spouse from testifying about communications made dependant on the sanctity of marriage, and one spouse can prevent the other from testifying.

A

Although the general rule of spousal immunity (one of the two “spousal privileges”) is that the spouse of a criminal defendant may not be called as a witness by the prosecution, and one spouse cannot be compelled to testify against the other in a criminal trial, the rule is different in federal court. In federal court, the witness spouse holds this privilege, and may choose to testify; the defendant spouse cannot prevent her from doing so by claiming the privilege

(Note that the rule is different for the “confidential marital communications” privilege—the other half of the “spousal privilege.”

The confidential marital communications privilege prevents either spouse from testifying about communications made dependant on the sanctity of marriage, and one spouse can prevent the other from testifying.