Evidence Flashcards
LOGICAL RELEVANCY
2 rules
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- All irrelevant evidence is inadmissible
2. All relevant evidence is admissible, absent an “exclusionary rule”
ex = R.403-412, hearsay rules, privilege, etc.
LOGICAL RELEVANCY
construction of relevancy rules
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
Construed LIBERALLY in favor of admitted evidence
LOGICAL RELEVANCY
definition of relevant
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
= evidence that has any tendency to prove or disprove a material fact
AKA 2 components = probative value + material facts
LOGICAL RELEVANCY
definition of probative value
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
= evidence that has any tendency to prove or disprove material fact
LOGICAL RELEVANCY
definition of material fact
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
= fact of consequence to a claim or defense (as determined by substantive law)
LEGAL RELEVANCY
basic principle + 6 FRE
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
Certain evidence, despite being logically relevant, is inadmissible for reasons such as public policy or unfair prejudice.
- FRE 403
- FRE 404-406
- FRE 407
- FRE 408 and 410
- FRE 409 and 411
- FRE 412-415
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 403
» rule
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
Otherwise relevant evidence is inadmissible if its probative value is SUBSTANTIALLY OUTWEIGHED by
- UNFAIR PREJUDICE,
- TIME concerns, or
- the potential that it is MISLEADING or might CONFUSE the jury
(but NOT unfair surprise)
This is a fact-sensitive determination made by the judge
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 403
» definition of unfairly prejudicial
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
evidence that invites the jury to make a decision on an IMPROPER ground
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 404 to 406
» D’s use of D’s character in case-in-chief in criminal case
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
relevant traits of accused (aka peacefulness in a murder case, honesty in a perjury or larceny case) are admissible to prove that accused is innocent
but OPINION and REP evidence only
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 404 to 406
» prosecutor’s response to D’s use of D’s character in criminal case
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
prosecutor may inquire about relevant specific acts of accused (including arrests) on cross-examination to discredit W’s testimony (i.e., are you aware or did you hear that accused was in a bar fight last week?)
BUT prosecutor must have good faith basis to ask question + no extrinsic evidence is allowed
on rebuttal, prosecutor may introduce bad opinion and reputation evidence of accused
(ex = “In my opinion, accused is violent”)
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 404 to 406
» D’s use of victim’s character in case-in-chief in criminal case
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
relevant traits of the victim (i.e., violence in a murder, battery, or assault case where accused claims self-defense) are admissible to prove that defendant is innocent; opinion and reputation only
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 404 to 406
» prosecutor’s response to D’s use of victim’s character in criminal case
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
on rebuttal, prosecutor may introduce good opinion and reputation evidence of victim (“In my opinion, victim is peaceful”) and
on rebuttal, prosecutor may introduce bad opinion and reputation evidence of accused (“Accused has a reputation for violence in community”—home, work, school, church) on same trait
if accused claims the victim was the first aggressor in a homicide case, prosecutor may introduce opinion and reputation evidence as to victim’s peacefulness on rebuttal EVEN IF ACCUSED OFFERS NO CHARACTER EVIDENCE
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 404 to 406
» use of character evidence in prosecutor’s case-in-chief
(rule + examples)
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
Rule = Although character evidence offered by the prosecution in its case-in-chief is not admissible to show the accused acted in conformity with his character or to imply that the accused has a bad character, it is admissible if it is independently relevant.
Thus, evidence of a specific crime or other bad act (even if no conviction) of the accused is admissible to prove motive, intent, absence of mistake or accident, identity crime, opportunity, or general scheme or plan.
– On request of the defendant, the prosecutor must give reasonable (and detailed) notice of her plans to use such evidence.
– Such “specific bad act” evidence is not admissible if the risk of unfair prejudice substantially outweighs its probative value.
Examples =
(a) evidence that D stole the getaway car the day before the bank robbery to prove general scheme
(b) evidence that D was arrested for a DUI in Chicago on July 1 to prove that he had the opportunity to commit murder in Chicago on July 1
(c) evidence that D was having an adulterous affair to prove motive for killing wife
(d) evidence that D stabbed A five years ago to prove that D’s recent shooting of A was not accidental
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 407
» rule
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
= Evidence that the defendant made repairs or changed policies, practices, designs, or personnel after an accident is not admissible to prove that the defendant is culpable, that a product was dangerous, or that a warning or instruction was needed.
Such evidence is admissible for other purposes, however, including to prove ownership or control of property (if disputed), to prove that a safer product was feasible (if controverted), or to prove spoliation.
Evidence of subsequent repairs is also admissible if it was performed by someone other than the defendant.
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 407
» similar happenings evidence
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
= Evidence that the plaintiff has been involved in prior accidents or claims is generally inadmissible, except to prove fraudulent claims or aggravation of prior injuries.
By contrast, evidence of prior accidents or claims (if substantially similar to plaintiff’s accident or claim) is generally admissible against the defendant to prove:
(i) the defendant had notice of an unsafe or illegal condition, event, or product;
(ii) the condition, event, or product was unsafe or illegal;
(iii) a safer design was feasible (if controverted by defendant); or
(iv) causation in a complex case (e.g., food poisoning).
Evidence of an absence of prior accidents (to prove the defendant’s property or product was safe) is rarely admissible
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 408 +410
» 4 types of inadmissible evidence to prove liability, guilt, or the amount of a civil claim
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- OFFERS to compromise or ACCEPTANCES of such offers in CIVIL cases
(including conduct and statements made during settlement negotiations)
BUT for this rule to apply, there must be a DISPUTE as to FAULT or the AMOUNT of the claim @ time of the offer - COMPROMISES
(aka settlements) - WITHDRAWN GUILTY PLEAS
(including statements made to prosecuting attorneys during plea bargaining process) - NO CONTEST PLEAS
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 408 +410
» admissibility of settlement offers/acceptances + settlements + withrawn guilty pleas + no contest pleas
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
INADMISSIBLE to prove liability, guilt, or the amount of a civil claim
ADMISSIBLE for other purposes
(like to prove bias or to negate a contention of undue delay by an insurer)
INADMISSIBLE for impeachment purposes
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 408 +410
» unwithdrawn guilty pleas
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
ADMISSIBLE
subject to the hearsay and impeachment rules
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 409 +411
» 2 rules
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- Evidence of offers to pay another’s medical expenses or the actual payment thereof (but not statements of fault made in connection therewith—compare FRE 408) is INADMISSIBLE
2. Evidence that a person has or does not have liability insurance is INADMISSIBLE to prove fault or ability to pay a judgment BUT is ADMISSIBLE to prove - ownership or - bias of W or - motive
LEGAL RELEVANCY
FRE 412 TO 415
» 2 rules
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- In sexual assault cases, opinion and reputation evidence of the victim’s character is INADMISSIBLE
2 narrow exceptions = specific instances
- of such character are admissible to prove origin of semen, pregnancy, or physical injuries is someone other than D
- of sex between D and victim also are admissible to prove consent
(very narrow + require pretrial notice before use of evidence)
- In both civil and criminal cases based on sexual assault, evidence that the accused (or D in civil case) has sexually assaulted others (even if not arrested or convicted) is admissible to prove that the accused is guilty
PRIVILEGES
basic principle
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
Relevant evidence is inadmissible at trial and undiscoverable before trial if it is protected by an evidentiary privilege.
PRIVILEGES
construction of privilege rules
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
The privilege rules are construed NARROWLY because they exclude otherwise relevant evidence
PRIVILEGES
federal privileges
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
For fed Qs cases, federal cts use federal COMMON LAW privileges
4 common law privileges =
- attorney-client privilege
- psychotherapist-patient privilege
- clergy-communicant privilege
- spousal privileges
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
attorney-client privilege
» rule
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
confidential communications
btwn attny (and her reps) and client (and his reps)
for the purpose of seeking legal advice
= protected from disclosure during discovery and at trial
privilege does not apply if non-essential 3Ps are involved in or overhear the communications.
BUT an eavesdropper will not destroy the privilege if the attorney and client took reasonable steps to preserve confidentiality
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
attorney-client privilege
» application for corporate employees
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
general rule = privilege applies to communications by corporate EEs
(regardless of their position)
when
- the communications concern matters w/in scope of employee’s corp duties
AND
- employee is aware that info is being furnished to enable attorney to provide legal advice to the corp
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
attorney-client privilege
» waiver
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
privilege belongs to CLIENT
client may waive it by disclosing a significant part of the confidential communication to an unprivileged 3P
BUT inadvertent disclosure does not constitute a waiver if the disclosing party
- had taken reasonable steps to prevent the disclosure AND
- after discovering the disclosure, took reasonable steps to rectify the error
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
attorney-client privilege
» scope of protection
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
privilege may not be used to shield preexisting documents or the facts themselves
privilege survives the client and the representation
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
attorney-client privilege
» exceptions
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
several exceptions to the privilege, including:
- client sought the communication to commit an ongoing or future crime or fraud (regardless of the lawyer’s knowledge)
- communications with joint clients (but such communications are still privileged as to outsiders)
- suits between the attorney and client, and suits, disciplinary actions, or crimes arising out of the representation
- communications were with now-deceased client about disposal of client’s estate
- client has placed the communication in issue
ALSO privilege doesn’t does not cover
- information incident to the representation AND
- observations made by lawyer if these same observations could have been made by 3P
(ex = lawyer notices scratch marks on client’s face)
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
attorney-client privilege
» information incident to the the representation
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
privilege doesn’t does not cover information INCIDENT TO THE REPRESENTATION, such as:
- fact that an attorney-client relationship exists
- client’s fee arrangement
- amount paid to lawyer by client
- client’s identity (except in rare cases)
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
psychotherapist-patient privilege
» rule
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
confidential communication btwn patient
and licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, or social worker
for purposes of treatment
= protected from disclosure during discovery and at trial
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
psychotherapist-patient privilege
» waiver
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
patient = holder of the privilege
patient may waive it voluntarily or accidentally
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
psychotherapist-patient privilege
» exceptions
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
there’s several exceptions,
including:
1. patient places her mental condition in issue
2. court-ordered exams
3. civil commitment hearings
ALSO tarasoff warning
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
psychotherapist-patient privilege
» tarasoff warning
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
in many states, if a patient makes specific threats regarding an identifiable 3P, psychotherapist must notify 3P of threats
= failure to do so will result in civil liability
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
clergy-communicant privilege
» rule
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
a person may - refuse to disclose AND prevent others from disclosing - communication - to a member of the clergy - for purposes of spiritual advice
privilege applies to the clergy of any religion and prevents disclosure during discovery and at trial
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
spousal privileges
» 2 privileges
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- Spousal immunity
2. Confidential marital communications privilege
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
spousal privileges
» spousal immunity
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
a person may not be compelled by the prosecution to testify
- about anything
(communications, events, etc.)
- against her spouse
(must be validly married @ time of trial)
- in a criminal trial or before a grand jury
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
spousal privileges
» 2 exceptions to spousal immunity
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
privilege does not apply
- to crimes committed against witness-spouse or children in their custody
- where the spouses are accused of jointly committing a crime
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
spousal privileges
» duration of spousal immunity
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
privilege ends upon divorce
must be validly married @ time of trial
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
spousal privileges
» waiver of spousal immunity
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
privilege belongs to witness-spouse
= witness-spouse may choose to waive it and voluntarily testify against her spouse
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
spousal privileges
» confidential marital communications privilege
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
privilege protects - confidential communications (aka not overheard by anyone else) - btwn spouses - made during a valid marriage
applies to both civil and criminal trials
NOTE = does not apply to observations made by spouses during the marriage
(b/c these aren’t confidential communications)
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
spousal privileges
» 2 exceptions to confidential marital communications privilege
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
does not apply
- to crimes committed against the witness-spouse or children in their custody
- where the spouses are accused of jointly committing a crime
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
spousal privileges
» duration of confidential marital communications privilege
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
continues after the marriage ends by divorce or the death of a spouse
FEDERAL PRIVILEGES
spousal privileges
» waiver of confidential marital communications privilege
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
belongs to BOTH spouses
= either spouse may prevent disclosure
waived if either spouse discloses a significant part of the confidential communication to 3P
PRIVILEGES
state law issues
» test tip
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
for state law questions (aka diversity issues), federal cts apply state privilege laws
for purposes of UBE, you should assume that states recognize same privileges as federal common law
PLUS a physician-patient privilege
PRIVILEGES
physician-patient privilege
» rule
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
STATE LAW ONLY
confidential communication
btwn a patient and a physician for purposes of treatment
= protected from disclosure
PRIVILEGES
physician-patient privilege
» waiver
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
STATE LAW ONLY
patient = the holder of the privilege and
patient may waive it voluntarily or accidentally
PRIVILEGES
physician-patient privilege
» exceptions
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
STATE LAW ONLY
privilege does not apply =
- when patient places his medical condition in issue
(ex = sues for personal injuries) - for communications btwn a patient and the patient’s testifying expert
- for communications btwn a patient and a FRCP 35 examiner
HEARSAY
definition of hearsay
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- an out-of-court statement
- by declarant
- that is offered for the truth of the matter asserted IN THE STATEMENT
RULE 801(c)
HEARSAY
general rule
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
INADMISSIBLE unless exception applies
RULE 802
HEARSAY
declarant
» definition
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
person who made the statement
RULE 801(b)
HEARSAY
witness
» definition
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
person who will be introducing declarant’s statement into courtroom, either by testifying to it or by introducing the statement in the form of a document
RULE 801
HEARSAY
statement
» definition
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
a person’s oral assertion, written assertion, or nonverbal conduct, if the person intended it as an ASSERTION
HEARSAY
assertion
» definition
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
declaration of fact or allegation of fact or opinion
HEARSAY
assertion
» form
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
need not be expressed as declarative statements, can also be questions
non-verbal conduct can also be a statement if declarant intends conduct to be assertive
HEARSAY
reasons to offer out-of-court statement OTHER THAN for truth of the matter asserted
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- Context
- Notice
- Effect on the Listener
- Verbal Act
- Circumstances Evidencing State of Mind
HEARSAY
nonhearsay
» 3 categories EXEMPT from hearsay rule under 801(d)(1)
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
NOT exceptions = FRE excludes 3 types of statements from declarant-witnesses from definition of hearsay
A. SWORN TESTIMONY = prior inconsistent statements made under oath at a trial, hearing, other proceeding, or deposition
B. CREDIBILITY = prior consistent statements offered to rebut an express or implied charge of recent fabrication or to rehabilitate the declarant’s credibility as W when attacked on other grounds
C. ID = out-of-court identification
RULE 801(d)(1)(A)-(C)
HEARSAY
nonhearsay
» 2 foundational requirements for 801(d)(1) sworn testimony
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
SWORN TESTIMONY requires the following to be exempt from hearsay rule:
- the declarant must testify at the proceeding and
- the opponent must have an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant about the statement
HEARSAY
nonhearsay // opposing party’s statement under FRE 801(d)(2)
» definition of opposing party statement
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
= any statement made or adopted by a party, by someone authorized by the party, by a party’s employee within the scope of employee, or, in criminal cases, by a co- conspirator within the scope and in furtherance of the conspiracy
BUT statement need not
- a confession
- against interest at the time it is made
RULE 801(d)(2)
HEARSAY
nonhearsay // opposing party’s statement under FRE 801(d)(2)
» format of statement
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
statement can be verbal or written
HEARSAY
nonhearsay // opposing party’s statement under FRE 801(d)(2)
» 2 examples
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
statement is offered against an opposing party and either:
(D) was made by the party’s agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship and while it existed
(E) was made by the party’s coconspirator during and in furtherance of the conspiracy
HEARSAY
hearsay exceptions
» 3 rules
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- RULE 803
- RULE 804
- RULE 807
HEARSAY
hearsay exceptions
» overview of FRE 803
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
23 hearsay exceptions under which evidence can be admitted REGARDLESS of whether the declarant is available to testify in court
HEARSAY
hearsay exceptions
» overview of FRE 804
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
4 hearsay exceptions under which evidence can be admitted only when the declarant is UNAVAILABLE to testify in court
HEARSAY
hearsay exceptions
» overview of FRE 807
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
additional exception for hearsay that does not meet the criteria in FRE 803 and FRE 804, but that nevertheless has EQUIVALENT circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness
HEARSAY
hearsay exceptions under FRE 803(1)-(4)
» present sense impression
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- The declarant must make the statement while actually perceiving an event or immediately thereafter (passage of even a few minutes’ time is enough to defeat the exception)
- The explanation of the event must be a simple description of the observed event or condition
- The declarant must have personal knowledge of the described event
RULE 803(1)
HEARSAY
hearsay exceptions under FRE 803(1)-(4)
» excited utterance
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- There must be a startling event
- The declarant must perceive the event
- The event must trigger the “stress of excitement” in the declarant
- The statement must relate to the startling event itself
RULE 803(2)
HEARSAY
hearsay exceptions under FRE 803(1)-(4)
» then-existing mental, emotional, or physical condition
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- The declarant’s bodily, emotional, or mental condition must be at issue in the case
- The statement must be a present or contemporaneous statement and NOT a statement of past feelings or conditions
- The statement must be of the declarant’s state of mind, not someone else’s
RULE 803(3)
HEARSAY
hearsay exceptions under FRE 803(1)-(4)
» statements for the purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- The statement must relate to the cause or condition
- statements describing what happened are admissible insofar as they are related to treatment - The statement must be made for the purpose of obtaining treatment
- whether made directly to medical personnel or even to a family member or caregiver, the key element is the declarant’s understanding that the statement is related to receiving treatment
RULE 803(4)
HEARSAY
hearsay exceptions under FRE 803(1)-(4)
» sufficient evidence of “stress of excitement”
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
generally, descriptions of the declarant’s
1. emotional state
2. physical appearance
3. behavior
4. condition
= suffice to demonstrate the stress of excitement
RULE 803(2)
HEARSAY
hearsay w/in hearsay + past recollection recorded + biz records
» rules
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
RULE 805 and RULES 803(5)-(7)
HEARSAY
hearsay w/in hearsay + past recollection recorded + biz records
» double hearsay
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
hearsay within hearsay is not excluded by the rule against hearsay if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the rule
RULE 805
HEARSAY
hearsay w/in hearsay + past recollection recorded + biz records
» recorded recollection
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
4 FOUNDATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
- W must demonstrate – on the stand – the inability fully and accurately to remember something about which W has actual personal knowledge
- The advocate’s efforts to refresh W’s recollection under FRE 612 must fail
- The advocate must establish that W made or adopted a record of the matter while it was still fresh in W’s mind
- there is no set time period for determining whether the matter was still fresh in W’s mind - The advocate must establish that the record correctly reflects W’s knowledge
RULE 803(5)
HEARSAY
hearsay w/in hearsay + past recollection recorded + biz records
» actual personal knowledge requirement for recorded recollection
[ what types of evidence are admissible ]
- memo or record must have been made or adopted by W when the matter was fresh in his mind and to reflect that knowledge correctly
- RULE 803(5) applies only to records or memos about which W once had knowledge but now has insufficient recollection to enable him to testify fully and accurately
RULE 803(5)