Evidence Flashcards
What are the rules for relevance?
Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make the existence of any fact of consequence to the determination of the action more probable than it would be without the evidence.
A trial judge may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of one or more of the following considerations: (1) danger of unfair prejudice, (2) confusion of the issues, (3) misleading the jury, (4) undue delay, (5) waste of time, (6) needless presentation of cumulative (repetitive) evidence.
Note: Unfair surprise is not a valid ground to exclude evidence.
What is habit evidence?
Habit evidence describes a person’s regular response to a specific set of circumstances. The two defining characteristics of this evidence are (1) frequency of conduct and (2) particularity of circumstances.
When is liability insurance admissible and not admissible?
Liability insurance is not admissible to show whether a party acted negligently or wrongfully. However, it is admissible for the following purposes: (1) to prove ownership or control, (2) to impeach a witness, or (3) as part of an admission of liability, where the reference to insurance coverage cannot be severed without lessening its probative value as an admission of liability.
When are subsequent remedial measures admissible and not admissible?
Evidence of repairs or other precautionary measures made following an injury are not admissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product or its design, or a need for a warning or instruction. However, it is admissible for the following purposes: (1) to prove ownership or control, (2) to rebut a claim that a precaution was not feasible, or (3) to prove that the opposing party has destroyed evidence.
When are settlement negotiations admissible and not admissible?
Evidence of a compromise (settlement) or an offer to compromise a civil claim is not admissible in any case to (1) prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim, or (2) impeach a witness by prior inconsistent statement or contradiction. Conduct or statements made in the course of negotiations a compromise are also inadmissible. However, this rule only applies if there was some indication a party was going to make a claim and there was a dispute as to either liability or amount.
Note: Evidence of settlement is admissible to impeach a witness on the ground of bias.
What is the rule for plea discussions?
The following are generally inadmissible in any criminal or civil case against the defendant who made the plea of participated in the discussions: (1) offers to plead guilty, (2) withdrawn guilty pleas, (3) actual pleas of nolocontendere, or (4) statements of fact made during any of the above plead discussions.
Note: An actual guilty plea is generally admissible in related litigation as a statement of an opposing party.
When are payments of and offers to pay medical expenses admissible?
Evidence that a party has paid or offered to pay an injured person’s medical, hospital, or similar expenses are inadmissible to prove liability for the injury. However, admissions of fact accompanying such payments and offers are admissible.
What are the rules for character evidence?
Character evidence refers to a person’s general propensity or disposition. Most character evidence is opinion and reputation testimony. Specific acts are only admissible as character evidence in limited circumstances.
Defendant’s Character in Criminal Cases: The defendant can provide reputation and opinion evidence concerning a pertinent trait of the defendant. However, doing so opens the door for the prosecution to do two things: (1) cross-examine the defendant’s character witness with “Have you heard” or “Did you know” questions related to specific acts the defendant committed that show the defendant’s bad character for the trait in question; and/or (2) call its its own character witness to provide reputation or opinion testimony related to the defendant’s bad character for the trait in question.
Victim’s Character in Criminal Cases: The defendant may introduce reputation or opinion evidence of a bad character trait of the alleged crime victim when it is relevant to show the defendant’s innocence. However, doing so allows the prosecution to introduce reputation or opinion evidence of (1) the victim’s good character for the same trait; or (2) the defendant’s bad character for the same trait.
Homicide Case With Self-Defense Claim: In a homicide case where the defendant pleads self-defense, the prosecution can immediately offer evidence of a victim’s good character for peacefulness if the defendant offers any evidence that the victim was the first aggressor.
Rape Victim’s Past Behavior: In any civil or criminal case involving alleged sexual misconduct, evidence offered to prove the sexual behavior or sexual disposition of the victim is generally inadmissible. In criminal cases, such evidence is admissible to prove someone other than the defendant is the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence. Additionally, the prosecution can use this evidence for any purpose and the defense can use this evidence to prove consent. In civil cases, such evidence is admissible unless its probative value substantially outweighs the danger of harm to the victim and of unfair prejudice to any party.
Defendant’s Sex Acts: Evidence of a defendant’s other acts of sexual assault or child molestation is admissible in a criminal or civil case where the defendant is accused of committing an act of sexual assault or child molestation.
Civil Cases: Character evidence is generally not admissible in civil cases unless proof of a person’s character is essential to an element of a claim or defense (e.g., defamation, negligent hiring or entrustment, or child custody). If admissible, it can be established with reputation, opinion, and specific acts.
When is misconduct admitted for a non-character purpose admissible?
Evidence of a person’s other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible if relevant to some other issue than their character or propensity to commit the crime character. The most common non-character purposes are motive, intent, absence of mistake or accident, identity, or common plan or scheme (MIMIC). In order for this to be admissible, there must be sufficient evidence to support a jury finding that the defendant committed this misconduct. Additionally, the prosecution must provide reasonable notice of its intent to offer this evidence at trial.
What are the rules for authenticating documents?
Documents can be authenticated using one of several methods: (1) an opponent’s admission, (2) eyewitness testimony, (3) handwriting verification in the form of (i) an opinion of a lay witness who is familiar with the alleged writer’s handwriting, (ii) the opinion of an expert who has compared the writing to samples of the alleged writer’s handwriting, or (iii) the fact-finder’s comparison of the writing to samples of the alleged writer’s handwriting, (4) ancient documents that are (i) at least 20 years old, (ii) in a condition that does not raise suspicions as to authenticity, and (iii) found in a place such a writing would likely be kept, (5) letters written in response to a communication, (6) photos and videos identified by a witness as portraying certain facts relevant to the issue and verified by the witness as a fair and accurate representation of those facts, and (7) x-ray pictures (witness cannot authenticate based on what he saw).
What are the rules for authentication of oral statements?
For authentication related to oral statement, the identity of the speaker is required.
Voice Identification: Testimony by the opinion of anyone who has heard the voice at any time.
Telephone Conversation: Testimony by any party to the call that (1) they recognized the other party’s voice; (2) the speaker had knowledge of certain facts that only a particular person would have; (3) they called a particular person’s number and a voice answered as that person or that person’s residence; or (4) they called a business and talked with the person answering the phone about matters relevant to the business.
What are the rules for best evidence?
Under the best evidence rule, to prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original document (or a duplicate) must be produced. This rule applies where the writing is a legally operative or dispositive instrument and where the knowledge of a witness concerning a fact results from having read the document. This rule does NOT apply if the witness has personal knowledge of facts to be proved.
Secondary Evidence: The court is allowed to consider secondary evidence of the document’s contents if a satisfactory explanation is given for the non-production of the original. Valid excuses include (1) loss or destruction of the original, (2) the original cannot be obtained by any available judicial process, or (3) the original is in the possession of an adversary who fails to produce it.
Exceptions: The best evidence rule does not apply to (1) summaries of voluminous records, (2) certified public records, (2) writings collateral to the litigated issue, and testimony or written admissions of a party opponent.
What are the requirements for witness competency?
A witness is presumed to be competent if (1) there is evidence the witness has personal knowledge on the matter in which he is to testify and (2) the witness gives an oath or affirmation to testify truthfully.
When can jurors testify?
Jurors may testify about (1) extraneous prejudicial information improperly brought to the jury’s attention, (2) outside influences improperly brought to the jury’s attention, (3) mistakes on the verdict form, or (4) whether any juror made a clear statement that they relied on racial stereotypes or animus to convict a criminal defendant.
What are the rules for leading questions?
Leading questions are GENERALLY allowed only on cross-examination and are not permitted on direct examination. However leading questions are normally allowed (1) to elicit preliminary or introductory matter, (2) when the witness needs help responding, or (3) when the witness is hostile, an adverse party, or a witness affiliated with an adverse party.
