Evidence Flashcards
What governs evidence rules?
Federal Rules of Evidence
Evidence may be admitted if it is…
Relevant
What is Relevant Evidence?
Evidence that proves or disproves a material fact.
Direct Evidence
Evidence that involves no inferences
Circumstantial Evidence
Evidence that is indirect and relies on inference
Limited Admisibiltiy
Court can limit evidence for one purpose but not another.
Can a court exclude evidence?
Yes - if the probative value of the evidence with respect to its legitimate purpose would be substantially outweighed by danger of unfair prejudice.
Relevance Analysis
(1) Is evidence relevant?
- After saying yes, it is relevant evidence but it is otherwise thrown out under a theory below.
(2) Is the probative value of the evidence substantially outweighed by…?
- unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, misleading jury,undue delay, waster of time.
- unfair surprise NOT ALLOWED
(3) Should it be excluded for public policy reasons? (Probably inadmissible if yes)
Then evidence is admissible, provided hearsay, best evidence rules do not apply.
What elements make evidence relevant?
Must relate to time, event, or person in controversy
Exception to Relevance - Previous Occurance
Previous similar occurrences may be relevant even though it doesn’t relate in time, event or person in controversy
What are some previous occurrence exceptions to relevance?
(1) Causation concerning other time, event persons
(2) Prior false claims
(3) Previous Similar accidents or injuries
(4) Previous Similar Acts
(5) Rebutting Impossibility
(6) Sales of Similar Property
(7) Habit
(8) Business Routine
(9) Industry Custom
Previous Similar Occurrence to Show Relevance: Previous Similar Accidents or Injuries
Admissible to prove:
(1) Existence of dangerous condition
(2) D had knowledge of the dangerous condition
(3) Dangerous condition cause of the injury
Previous Similar Occurrence to Show Relevance: Habit
Admit evidence of person’s regular response, instinctiveness, automatic trait or habit to a specific set of circumstances.
Note - habit is specific, character is general
Situations where Relevant evidence should be excluded because probative value of the evidence substantially outweighed by…
unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, misleading jury,undue delay, waster of time.
unfair surprise NOT ALLOWED
Public policy reasons for excluding relevant evidence
(1) Liability insurance
(2) Subsequent remedial measures
(3) Settlement offers or negotiations
(4) Withdrawn guilty pleas
(5) Offers to pay medical expenses
Liability insurance
Inadmissible: to prove negligence
Admissible: to prove ownership or control/liability
Subsequent Remedial Measures
Inadmissible: to prove negligence, defect in design, need for warning
Admissible: to prove ownership or control, rebut claim that precautions were impossible to prove
Settlement Offers
Inadmissible: to prove or disprove validity or amount of disputed claim
Admissible: for all other purposes
Withdrawn guilty pleas
Inadmissible: For nearly all purposes
Admissible: Not admissible
Offers to pay medical bills
Inadmissible: To prove culpable conduct
Admissible: For all other purposes - Admissions of fact accompanying offers to pay medical expenses admissible.
Character Evidence
Admissible to (1) prove character when it is the ultimate issue in the case or (2) serve as circumstantial evidence of how a person probably acted.
Ways or presenting character evidence
(1) Evidence of specific acts
(2) Opinion testimony of a witness who knows the person
(3) General reputation in the community
When is character evidence admissible?
Civil: not admissible unless directly at issue (ex. defamation)
Criminal: Admissible once defendant opens the door and present evidence on his character in either REPUTATION or OPINION. Then D can
(1) cross examine D and show all three (rep, op, specfic acts), OR
(2) Bring up witness and bring up reputation OR opnion only, NO SPECIFIC ACTS
Presenting Character Evidence of Victim
Can be done - D may introduce reputation or opinion evidence of victims bad character when it is relevant to show D’s innocence. Then P may introduce evidence of victim’s good character for the same trait or D’s bad character for the same trait.