Evidence Flashcards
Relevancy
Evidence is relevant if it has any tendancy to make a material fact more probable or less probable than would be the case without the evidence.
TWO ELEMENTS:
- MATERIAL
- PROBATIVE - ANY tendancy
Pregmatic considerations that may keep relevant evidence out
Court may exclude if the probative value is outweighed by danger of
- unfair prejudice
- confusing the issues
- misleading the jury
- undue delay
- waste of time
- unduly cummulative
Prior Acts/Similar Occurences
Generally, Accident History/Prior Similar Conduct or Acts is NOT admissible because just goes to propensity, which is not a permissible purpose. BUT EXCEPTIONS:
- A Plaintiff’s prior accidents ARE admissible if the event that caused P’s injuries is in issue - i.e. when there’s a question about what accident actually caused the injury.
- Other accidents involving the same instrumentality or condition MAY be admitted if the prior accident occurred under substantially similar circumstances to show: (1) existence of dangerous condition, (2)
causation, (3) d
efendant had prior notice of the danger.
- Intent in issue - Prior similar conduct may be admissible to raise an inference of the person’s intent on a later occassion (regularly mistreated qualified femaile applicants to show discriminatory intent)
- Comparable Sales on Issue of Value - selling price of property of similar type, location, and close in time
- HABIT - habit/routine of a person is admissible to show how person acted on the occasion at hand. Must be repretitive response to a particular set of circumstances (frequency and particularity of conduct)
- Industrial Custom as Standard of Care - not binding but admissible.
Liability Insurance Admissibility
- NOT admissible to show fault or basence of fault
- EXCEPT
- may be admissible to show ownership/control, location, or some other issue IF the issue is disputed by D.
- to impeach a witness (to show bias, etc.)
Admissibility of Subsequent Remedial Measures
- Post-accident repairs, design or policy changes are INadmissible to show negligence, culpabilit, product defect, or need for warning.
- BUT
- may be admissible for some other purpose, including ownership/control or feasibility of safer condition IF DISPUTED by D.
Admissibility of Civil Settlements/Negotiations
Where there is a DISPUTED civil claim (doesn’t require litigation to have commenced, just a disputed claim):
- settlement
- offer to settle and
- a statement of fact made during settlement discussions
are INADMISSIBLE to show liability or to impeach a witness.
BUT
- admissible to impeach a witness on the grounds of bias (e.g. P2 settled and now testifying for D against P1) and
- statements of fact made during settlement discussion in civil litigation with a government agency ARE admissible in later criminal prosecution (NOT settlements/offer to settle)
Plea Bargaining in Criminal Case
- NOT ADMISSIBLE:
- offer to plead guilty
- Withdrawn guilty plea
- Nolo Contendere plea
- Statement of Fact made during any plea discussions
- ADMISSIBLE
- plea of guilty (not withdrawn) is admissible in subsequent litigation based on same facts as party admission
Offer to Pay Medical Expenses
NOT admissible to prove liability. BUT other statements made at the same time may be admissible.
Character Evidence in Criminal Cases
Defendant’s character
- to prove conduct in conformity therewith = inadmissible during prosecution’s case in chief
- D may intrudce evidence of a relevant character trait (reputation or opinion testimony, NOT specific acts) = OPENS THE DOOR
- trait must be relevant to crime charged, reputation for law-abiding works
- Prosecution may then present contrary evidence about the SAME trait in rebuttal
Victim’s Character
- D may introduce evidence of V’s violent character to prove conduct in conformity for SELF DEFENSE claim
- Prosecution may rebut with evidence of V’s Good character OR with evidence of D’s same bad character trait (violence)
- Homicide case - if D claims V was first aggressor, Prosecution can offer evidence re: victims peaceful character
- SEPARATE PURPOSE - D may introduce evidence that he was AWARE of V’s reputation/past specific violent acts to show his fear/reasonable reaction
Character Evidence - Sexual Misconduct
Both criminal and civil cases - where D alleged to have engaged in sexual misconduct, opinion or repuration about the victim’s sexual propensity or specific sexual behavior INADMISSIBLE
EXCEPT, in criminal cases, D may offer:
- specific sexual behavior of V to prove someone other than D was source of semen or injury to V
- V’s prior sexual activity *with D *if D’s asserts consent defense
- Due Process Rights of D - love triangle defense - to show that V lied about consent to try to protect sexual relationship with a 3rd person
Character Evidence in Civil Cases
- INADMISSIBLE (generally) - don’t get the same break as Ds in criminal cases b/c liberty not at stake
- ADMISSIBLE where character is an essential element of a claim - only 3
- Tort action for negligent hiring to show employee careless person and D should have known
- Defamation
- Child Custody Dispute
D’s Past Bad Acts
Past crimes or bad acts NOT admissible during case in chief to show propensity.
BUT admissible if they go to:
- Motive
- Intent
- Mistake/Accident, or absence thereof
- Identity (MO)
- Common Scheme or Plan - must show that in D’s mind all the crimes were part of one overall transaction seaking to achieve a specific goal
Prosecution may be required to give pre-trial notice of MIMIC evidence, and must meet **conditional relevancy burden **of proof - sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to conclude D committed past act (prior conviction always sufficient).
May also be admissible in civil cases.
Sexual Misconduct of D
In sexual assault or child molestation cases (civil or criminal), prior specific sexual misconduct of the D is admissible in P’s case in chief, INCLUDING TO SHOW PROPENSITY.
*Reputation and opinion evidence NOT allowed, only prior specific acts
