Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Bar Prep Course > Evidence > Flashcards

Evidence Flashcards

1
Q

Relevant Evidence

A

Evidence having ANY tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more or less probably than it would be without the evidence.

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

Admissions

A

Statement of a party (oral/written assertion/conduct)
Used against them by their opponent
Can be anything (words, letters, documents)

EMISSION - anything that comes out of the mouth of a party is an admission. Doesn’t have to be “I shot her”

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

FRE 1002: Best Evidence Rule

A

To prove the contents of a writing (recording, photo, x-ray) the original must be produced UNLESS shown to be unavailable.

Applies where contents are in issue (ex. where the testimony is reliant on the writing, not on personal knowledge)

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

Privilege Against Self-Incrimination

A

Testimonial in nature - only applies ON THE STAND.

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

Preliminary Questions of Admissibility

A

Questions concerning qualification of a person to be a witness, existence of a privilege, or admissibility of evidence shall be determined by the COURT.

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

Burden of persuasion in civil action

A

Preponderance of the Evidence

Burden on PLAINTIFF

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

Burden of persuasion in criminal action

A

Beyond a reasonable doubt

Burden on PROSECUTION

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

Habit evidence

A

Evidence of the habit of a person, or the routine practice of an organization is admissible to prove conduct.

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

Do you need corroboration for habit evidence?

A

NOPE.

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

Subsequent remedial measures

A

Evidence of subsequent remedial measures is inadmissible to prove negligence.

EXCEPTIONS: ownership, control

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

Tender years exception to hearsay

A

NOT a thing under the Federal Rules of Evidence.

But some states have adopted it.

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

Exceptions to Subsequent Remedial Measures general rule

A

OWNERSHIP and CONTROL

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

Settlement Offers

A

Offers to settle claim in “dispute” are INADMISSIBLE.

Admissions are NOT severed (inadmissible)

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

Offers to pay medical bills

A

Offers to pay medical expenses of another are INADMISSIBLE

Admissions ARE severed (admissible)

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

Character Evidence in CRIMINAL cases - Character of the Defendant

A

D may OPEN THE DOOR with reputation or opinion evidence (not specific acts) of his good character to prove his innocence and the prosecution MAY SO REBUT.

D has to open the door first.

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

Character Evidence in Criminal Cases - Character of the Victim

A

Where evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the alleged victim is offered by the ACCUSED (D), the prosecution MAY REBUT the same way.

Again, the D has to introduce it first.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Character Evidence in CIVIL cases - types of cases where you use it (where it’s in issue) Big 4

A

Defamation
Negligent Hiring
Negligent Entrustment
Child Custody

Door does NOT need to be opened. So focus on cause of action

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

How to approach character in CRIMINAL

A

Door opened? (how’s it opened? with trait, or reputation/opinion)
Trait?
Reputation/opinion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

How to approach character in CIVIL

A

Character in issue?? (typically not, unless one of the Big 4)
Big 4?? (Defamation, Negligent Hiring, Negligent Entrustment, Child Custody)
R, O, SA (reputation, opinion, specific acts) all come in.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

4 Main ways to Impeach

A
  1. Bias/Prejudice - friend
  2. Sensory Defects
  3. Prior Inconsistent Statement - which time were you lying
  4. Character to Impeach
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Bias/ Prejudice of a witness

A

Bias of a witness is ALWAYS considered RELEVANT

A witness can be impeached by showing that he has a reason for lying about or misrepresenting facts bc he is:

  • biased in favor of a party
  • prejudiced against a party, OR
  • has in interest in the outcome
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Collateral Matter Rule

A

Excludes irrelevant extrinsic evidence

DOES NOT APPLY WHEN DEALING WITH BIAS/PREJUDICE of a witness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Prior Inconsistent Statement - when can use for substance?

A 
Admissible substantively in 3 cases:
1. If "sworn" under FRE 801(d)(1)
2. As an admission under FRE 801(d)(2)
OR
3. If a Hearsay Exception applies
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Usually, how do you use prior inconsistent statement?

A

Usually, for IMPEACHMENT.

But can use substantively if sworn under FRE 801(d)(1), an admission under FRE 801(d)(2), or if a hearsay exception applies

25
Q

Sensory Defects

A

Any sensory or mental defect that might affect a witness’s capacity to observe, recall, or relate the events about which the witness has testified is admissible to impeach.

Like, photo showing that the police officer couldn’t possibly have seen the D from the position they were both in (was a building between them) so couldn’t have seen what he says he saw.

26
Q

Prior Bad Act Impeachment

A

Reputation or opinion testimony about the witness involving TRUTHFULNESS. Narrow.

Questions regarding specific instances of conduct allowed on cross-examination. Have to bring in on cross, or it’s not coming in.

27
Q

Convictions to Impeach

A

Felony conviction
Convictions involving dishonesty or false statement

IF INVOLVES DISHONESTY, WE DON’T CARE ABOUT 403

28
Q

FRE 404(b) - Mimic Rule

A

Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is NOT admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It MAY, however, be admissible for other purposes:

M - Motive
I - Intent
M - Absence of Mistake/Knowledge
I - Identity
C - Common Plan or Scheme
29
Q

10 Year Rule

A

To bring in conviction for crime involving dishonesty or false statement - needs to have completed sentence for the conviction in the last 10 years.

10 years start AFTER the release, or the conviction itself if didn’t serve any time.

30
Q

What is NOT hearsay?

A

Admissions
Prior Consistent Statements
Prior Identifications

31
Q

Hearsay exceptions

A

Present Sense Impression
Excited Utterance
Dying Declaration
Business Records

Consider 403 Balancing test

32
Q

Approach to hearsay

A
  1. Isolate the statement
  2. Determine who is the declarant
  3. Purpose for which the evidence is being offered:
    - for its truth = hearsay
    - not for its truth = NOT hearsay
  4. Apply the hearsay exceptions
33
Q

Effect on listener - NOT hearsay

A 
FRE 803(3)
Circumstantial evidence offered to show:
-Knowledge
-Intent
-Attitude
-Belief
of the declarant or of the listener
34
Q

Effect on the listener - Hearsay EXCEPTION

A

Statement of then existing state of mind or physical condition

  • Intent
  • Design
  • Plan
  • Motive

Offered for its TRUTH

35
Q

Statements Made for Medical Treatment or Diagnosis

A

Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain, or sensations, or external source thereof insofar as REASONABLY PERTINENT TO DIAGNOSIS OR TREATMENT.

Think - would it help a lawyer or a doctor more? If lawyer, then not going to fall under this.

36
Q

FRE 803(6) - Business Record

A
  1. Report or record concerning act or event
  2. made at or near the time
  3. by a person with knowledge
  4. kept in the regular course of business.

Need all 4

37
Q

Past Recollection Recorded

A

A witness can read from a writing if:

  1. The witness once had personal knowledge of the writing
  2. Witness now forgets the writing and showing the writing to the witness does not jog his memory
  3. Writing was either made by the witness OR adopted by the witness
  4. Writing was made when the event was fresh in the witness’s memory, AND
  5. Witness can attest that, when made, the writing was accurate
38
Q

Absence of Entry in a Business Record

A

Lack of a record to prove that a transaction or occurrence had not taken place, is admissible if it was the regular practice of the business to record such events if they had actually occurred.

39
Q

FRE 803(2) - Excited Utterance

A

Statement relating to a startling event made while declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event.

40
Q

FRE 804(b)(2) - Dying Declaration

A
  1. Statement MUST concern cause or circumstances of death
  2. Unavailable declarant
  3. Criminal homicide or any civil case
  4. Declarant’s belief of imminent death

If the declarant is AVAILABLE - then this isn’t going to come in.

41
Q

Confrontation Clause

A

Requires that:
-in a criminal case
-where the declarant is unavailable:
“Testimonial” evidence is INADMISSIBLE unless the D is given a prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant.

NOT for civil cases.

42
Q

What is testimonial? (Confrontation Clause)

A

Testimonial - primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events relevant to later prosecution (Hammon v. Indiana)

NOT Testimonial - Primary purpose is to obtain police assistance to meet an ongoing emergency (Davis v. Washington) - so can come in without cross-examination requirement.

43
Q

FRE 804(b)(3) - Declaration Against Interest

A

Statement of an:

  1. Unavailable
  2. Non-party (generally)
  3. Against interest when made (penal, pecuniary or proprietary)
44
Q

FRE 804(b)(1) - Former Testimoney

A

Testimony from the same or different proceeding or in a deposition
Unavailable declarant
Opportunity and similar motive to develop the testimony on direct, cross, or redirect

45
Q

FRE 804(b)(4) - Statement of Pedigree

A

A statement concerning the declarant’s own relationship by blood, adoption, or marriage or other similar fact of personal or family history.

Still need an unavailable declarant for a statement under this exception to come in.

46
Q

When are LEADING QUESTIONS Appropriate??

A
  • On cross
  • Hostile or adverse witness
  • Questioning children
  • Refreshing a witness
  • Preliminary background matters
47
Q

Spousal Privilege

A

Protects communications BEFORE and DURING marriage (impressions/observations)
Privilege LOST at divorce

ONLY in CRIMINAL

48
Q

Who holds Spousal Privilege?

A

Common law
Party spouse
Federal Courts (majority)
Witness Spouse

49
Q

Marital Privilege

A

Protects communications ONLY during marriage.
Privilege SURVIVES divorce.

BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL.

50
Q

Who holds Marital Privilege?

A

Both spouses

51
Q

Attorney-Client Privilege

A

Communications between a client and her attorney are inadmissible

Rationale - by assuring confidentiality the privilege encourages clients to make “full and frank” disclosures to their attorneys, who are then better able to provide candid advice and effective representation.

52
Q

Opinion testimony test

A

Lay witnesses MAY offer opinion testimony if:

  • opinions must be based on first-hand knowledge or perception, AND
  • helpful to the finder of fact
53
Q

What do you generally need for FRE 804 exceptions??

A

THE DECLARANT NEEDS TO BE UNAVAILABLE.

Either dead, or invokes the 5th A, outside the reach of the jdx (in Borneo or something), etc.

54
Q

Prior inconsistent statements can only be admitted to provide substantive evidence or prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement IF they are sworn statements made under oath and subject to the penalty of perjury.

TRUE OR FALSE?

A

TRUE.

55
Q

Are prior inconsistent statements admissible for impeachment purposes?

A

YES. They are not hearsay if used for the purpose of impeachment.

56
Q

Are statements of a past bodily condition (made by a doctor) admissible?

A

YES. Rule 803(4) - a statement made “for the purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain or sensation” is admissible into evidence.

57
Q

Extrinsic evidence of a witness’s prior inconsistent statement is only admissible if…

A

if the witness has an opportunity to explain or deny the prior inconsistent statement, and the adverse party has an opportunity to examine the witness about it.

So, if you fail to cross examine a witness about a statement, can’t then introduce evidence of prior inconsistent statement.

58
Q

Can you admit a certificate of conviction?

A 
YES:
FRE 803(22) allows for an otherwise hearsay certificate of conviction if: 1) the conviction is for a felony offense, AND 2) it is necessary to prove an essential element in the civil case.

Bar Prep Course (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions