Evidence Flashcards
Relevance
For evidence to be admissible in a court of law, it must be both logical and legally relevant
Logical evidence (FRE)
Evidence is logically relevant if it tends to prove/disprove a material fact
CA logical relevance standard
evidence is logically relevant if it is material to a disputed fact
Legal relevant
Evidence may be relevant if its probative value is substanitally outweighed by danger of unfair prejudice, confusing issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time or being needlessly cummlative
CA Prop 8
Prop 8 applies to all criminal trials in CA. It’s the Victim’s Bill of Rights and provides that all relevant evidence is admissible, subject to balancing, with exceptions, including 1) the exclusionary rule; 2) the secondary/best evidence rule; 3) hearsay exclusions; 4) rape shield rules; 5) privilege exclusions; 6) limits on prosecutor offering specific evidence prior to defendant opening the door.
CA 352 balancing
when there is a substantive likelihood that the evidence is more prejudicial than probative the court must conduct a balancing test when determining admission
When would relevant evidence by excluded for public policy reasons
subsequent remedial measures
settlement offers or negoitation
offers to pay medical expenses
withdrawn guility pleas
Liability insurance
CA specific- relevant evidence by excluded for public policy reasons
expression of sympathy
mediation statements and writting
Sympathy policy exclusion
, expressions of sympathy are inadmissible but accompanying statements of fault in connection with these statements are admissible.
Competence and Personal Knowledge
Non-expert witnesses must be competent and have personal knowledge of a matter to testify about the matter. Witnesses cannot be physically or mentally impaired and cannot be too young to understand the oath and the need to testify truthfully.
In CA competence is
presumed
Authentication def
A party must prove the item it seeks to admit is actually what the party purports it to be.
Evidence can be authenticated by
witness testimony or evidence of holding in a substantially unbroken chain of custody.
Vocal recognition
A voice may be identified by the opinion of anyone who has heard the voice at any time, even the same day or during current trial proceedings.
Signature recognition
A jury can verify the authenticity of a signature with an appropriate example to compare.
Best Evidence Rule / Secondary Evidence Rule (CA)
A party must provide the original document when testifying to contents of a writing. A photocopy is an acceptable substitute. Oral testimony is allowable only after showing original is not available for some reason other than misconduct.
CA Secondary Evidence rule accepts
accepts duplicates and hand-written evidence of the contents of an original document.
Character evidence
Generally, evidence of a person’s character is not admissible to show propensity. However, character evidence is generally admissible for any non-propensity purpose, such as when character is an ultimate issue in a case (i.e. defamation) or to impeach.
In criminal cases, a defendant may always provide evidence of his own character. Prosecution is not allowed
to do so until the defendant opens the door.
CA exception to D’s character
Prosecution can initate a showing of the D’s act of DV or elder abuse
V’c character
A defendant may provide evidence of the victim’s character to prove the defendant’s innocence - except rape. If so, prosecution can show the victim’s good character for the same trait, or the defendant’s bad character.
In CA for a victim’s character what are the only traits that can be introduce
violent
Sex Offense Cases
A victim’s sexual behavior is inadmissible except 1) to show the defendant and the victim had previous sex, evidencing consent, or by the prosecutor for any reason they deem fitting. This type of evidence cannot be introduced in a civil case.
D’s character - CA only can be proven by what type of evidence and when?
allows reputation and opinion evidence to prove character, whether on cross or direct.
Method of admission - Under the FRE, when character evidence is admissible, it may be proven in the following ways:
on direct by opinion or reputation testimony or
on cross, add speific acts
In CA the ds character may only be proven by
opinion or rep
In CA the v’s character may only be proven by
opinion, rep or specific acts
404b Prior Bad acts
Prior crimes are not admissible to show propensity. However, evidence of prior bad acts may be admissible for other relevant non-propensity purposes, such as proving Motive, Identity, Absence of Mistake or Accident, Intent, a Common Plan or Scheme, Opportunity, or Preparation.
Prior Convictions
Felony or misdemeanor convictions involving dishonesty are always admissible to impeach. Felonies not for dishonesty have a 10-year limit from latter of conviction or release from confinement. Requires probative value/prejudicial effect determination, and proper notice must be given.
In CA prior convictions requires to be tested under which statutes
CEC 352 balancing for moral turpitude crimes, and misdemeanors are admissible under Prop 8.
Prior Inconsistent Statements and when can you use extrinstric evidence
These statements are admissible to impeach. Extrinsic evidence is admissible only if relevant to a material issue and a proper foundation is laid.
CA - Prior Inconsistent Statements
admissible as non-hearsay when offered only to impeach a witness, and whether or not under oath.
Lay witness
is any person that is not an expert. They must take an oath to tell the truth, and have capacity to perceive, recall and communicate. Lay witness testimony cannot be based on specialized or scientific knowledge.
Lay witness - CA
witness must understand the legal duty to tell the truth. They may offer an opinion and tesitfy to scientic and specialized knowledge evidence if it is rationally based on the witness’ perception, and it is helpful to the jury.
Expert Witness
– Expert testimony is appropriate only when the subject matter is one where scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge would assist the trier of fact. The witness must believe the opinion, it must be supported by fact and based on reliable principles.
Expert Witness in CA you use which standards
Kelly / Frye Standard
Daubert / Kumho Standard