Evidence Flashcards
The Doctrine of Limited Admissibility (FRE 105)
Allows the court to admit evidence to be used for one purpose but not another
Relevance (401)
Evidence is relevant if it has ANY tendency to prove or disprove a material fact of consequence
Pragmatic Relevance Test (FRE 403) + Tip + Remember
Relevant evidence may be excluded if the PROBATIVE VALUE is SUBSTANTIALLY OUTWEIGHED by the danger of six trial/pragmatic concerns (unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, mislead jury, waste of time, etc.).
Tip: The evidence should relate to some time, event, or person in the present lawsuit (or similar occurrence).
Remember: FRE 403 FAVORS admissibility
Habit Evidence (FRE 406) + Tip
Admissible to describe one’s regular response to a specific set of circumstances and to show the person acted in the same way on the occasion in question.
Tip: Look for 1) particularity and 2) frequency (e.g. “always,” “instinctively,” “invariably,” or “automatically”)
Habit Evidence for Organizations
Habit evidence can be used to establish routine practice of an organization
Subsequent Remedial Measures (FRE 407) + Exception
Evidence of repairs or other precautionary measures made following an injury is inadmissible to prove negligence or a defect in product design.
Exception: Subsequent remedial measures are admissible to prove FDIC. (Feasibility, Destruction of evidence, Impeachment, Control of ownership.)
Settlement Offers in Civil Cases (FRE 408) + Remember + Exception
Evidence of compromise is inadmissible to prove or disprove the validity or amount of disputed claims or to impeach through prior inconsistent statements
Remember: There must be a claim disputed about fault OR damages, otherwise this rule will not come into play.
Exception: Settlements CAN be used to show the bias of a witness for impeachment purposes.
Pleas and Plea Discussions in Criminal Cases (FRE 410) + Remember
Neither withdrawn guilty pleas, pleas of nolo contendere (no contest), offers to plead guilty, nor evidence of statements made in negotiating such pleas are admissible in any proceeding.
Remember: If D pleads guilty in a criminal case, the plea may be admissible as an admission in a subsequent civil case.
Offers to Pay Medical Expenses and Similar Expenses (FRE 409) + Remember
Evidence that a party furnished or offered to pay hospital, medical, or similar expenses is inadmissible.
Remember: If a party makes an ADMISSION OF GUILT during an offer to pay, it IS ADMISSIBLE as admission/opposing party’s statement.
Liability Insurance (FRE 411) + Exceptions
Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is NOT admissible to prove the person was negligent or not at fault.
Exceptions: 1) Ownership of control and 2) Bias of witness
Character Evidence: Prohibited Use (FRE 404)
Evidence of a person’s character is inadmissible to prove conforming conduct, unless it meets recognized exception
Methods of Proving Character
1) Reputation in the community
2) Opinion testimony
3) Specific acts relevant to the character trait
Character Evidence of Defendant in Criminal Cases Offered by Defendant
The criminal defendant may introduce evidence of his own pertinent character trait (using ONLY reputation or opinion), but this opens the door for the prosecution to rebut.
Character Evidence of Defendant in Criminal Cases Rebutted by Prosecution + Remember
Prosecution may rebut the defendant’s character evidence by: 1) calling its own W to testify to the D’s relevant bad character (ONLY in the form of reputation or opinion), and 2) cross-examining D’s character W by questioning their knowledge of specific acts RELEVANT to the character trait.
Remember: Good faith requirement - prosecution must have a good faith basis to believe that the specific act took place and accept the W’s answer.
Character Evidence of Victim’s Character in Criminal Case Offered by Defendant
A criminal defendant may offer evidence of the victim’s VIOLENT character to prove that the victim was the first aggressor in the form of reputation or opinion
Character Evidence of Victim’s Character in Criminal Case Rebutted by Prosecution
Prosecution may offer: 1) evidence of victim’s good character for the pertinent trait, or 2) attack D’s character for same trait.
Character Evidence of Victim’s Character Special Homicide Case Rule (FRE 404(C))
In a homicide case where the D claims the victim was the first aggressor, the prosecution may offer evidence of the alleged victim’s trait of peacefulness to rebut D’s claim.
Character Evidence Main Exception in Civil Cases + Remember
Evidence of a person’s character is admissible in civil actions where such character is an essential element of a claim or defense, such as: Defamation, Negligent entrustment/hiring, child custody.
Remember: All three methods of introducing character evidence are allowed here (reputation, opinion, and bad acts)
Other Crimes for Non-Character Purpose (FRE 404(B)) + Tip + Remember (2)
If the defendant’s other crimes or specific bad acts are offered for SOME OTHER PURPOSE other than propensity, the evidence will not be barred by the rule against character evidence
Tip: MIMIC (motive, intent, absence of mistake, identity, common plan or scheme)
Remember (1): This applies in EITHER civil or criminal cases.
Remember (2): This evidence can be offered by either side.
General Rule of Authentication
Any writing offered into evidence must first be authenticated by laying a foundation to show the evidence is genuine. (E.g. admission, eyewitness testimony, or handwriting proof)
Best Evidence Rule + Exception
A party seeking to introduce the contents of a writing must either: 1) produce the original document, or 2) account for the absence of the original. If the explanation for the absence is reasonable, then a foundation has been laid for secondary evidence.
Exception: Where the witness has personal knowledge of events or items described in the writing, INDEPENDENT of the writing.
Refreshing Recollection
The witness cannot read from a prepared memorandum; must testify based on their current recollection. BUT, if the witness can’t recall, you can use ANYTHING to job their memory (typically a document).
Refreshing Recollection: Opponent’s Rights
The opponent is entitled to inspect the writing and offer it into evidence.
Lay Witness (FRE 701)
Lay witness opinion is admissible if: 1) Rationally based on witness’s perception, 2) assists the jury in deciding facts, AND 3) not based on scientific or specialized knowledge.
Expert Witness (FRE 702) + Basis of Expert’s Opinion (FRE 703) + Tip
Must be educated or trained in the proper subject matter.
Basis of Opinion: Expert must have opinion to REASONABLE degree of probability or certainty on ONE OR MORE: 1) Facts from own observation, 2) Evidence made known to expert at or before hearing, and 3) facts outside the record (including inadmissible hearsay) if of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the field.
Tip: To be admitted, an expert’s testimony must be GRREAT. GATEKEEPER (trial court acts as gatekeeper to determine if expert is used), RELIABLE method is used by expert, RELEVANT, EVIDENCE that will ASSIST the TRIER of fact.
Prior Inconsistent Statement - Impeachment
ANY witness can be impeached by showing that he or she made a material statement inconsistent with the witness’s trial testimony.
Bad Reputation or Opinion About Witness’s Character for Truthfulness (FRE 608 (A))
Any witness may be impeached through reputation or opinion by permitting extrinsic evidence
Criminal Convictions (FRE 609) + Remember
Crimes Involving Dishonesty or False Statement: Any crime (felony or misdemeanor) may be used to impeach if it involves lying, deceit, or false statement WITHOUT the court’s discretion (e.g. fraud, embezzlement, perjury).
Felonies that DO NOT Involve Dishonesty or False Statement: Only a felony with the court’s discretion may be used to impeach a witness.
Time Frame: Generally, 10 years from the conviction OR release from prison, whichever is later.
Remember: Extrinsic evidence is permitted.
Bad Acts (Not Convictions) Relating to Witness’s Character for Truthfulness (FRE 608(b)) + Remember (3)
On cross-examination of a witness, specific acts may be inquired to the witness if they are probative of truthfulness.
Remember (1): No extrinsic proof is permitted.
Remember (2): Cross-examiner MUST have a good-faith basis
Remember (3): A cross-examiner can ask about the act BUT NOT the consequences of the act. (e.g. not allowed to ask if SUSPENDED for lying on a law school app, just the lying)
Bolstering
Introducing evidence to support a witness’s credibility before credibility is attacked AND is NOT ALLOWED.
Hearsay Definition
An out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted (TOMA)
Common Non-hearsay Purposes
1) Legally operative facts (e.g. offered to prove the statement was made)
2) Impeachment
3) Effect on listener
4) State of mind
Hearsay Exclusions
Declarant Witness:
1) Prior Inconsistent Statement
2) Prior Consistent Statement
3) Prior Statement of Identification
Opposing Party’s Statement:
1) Party’s Own Admission
2) Adoptive Admission
3) Vicarious Admission
4) Co-Conspirator
Co-Conspirator Statements + Remember
Statements by a co-conspirator made DURING the course of the conspiracy and IN FURTHERANCE of the conspiracy are admissible to prove the TOMA in either civil or criminal cases if: a conspiracy existed, declarant was a member, and offered against a member of the conspiracy
Remember: Judge may let in statement of co-conspirator, subject to later independent proof of conspiracy
Adoptive Statement + Tip + Remember
A party adopts another person’s statement as true by words, conduct, OR remaining silent.
Tip: For silence as an adoptive statement/admission, the party must have (HURT): Heard the statement, Understood the statement, and a Reasonable person would have Taken exception.
Remember: Adoptive admissions do not count after being Mirandized
Vicarious Admission Statements
Statements by employees are admissible against her employer IF her admission:
1) was made within the scope of the employment
2) made while declarant was employed
Prior Inconsistent Statement + Remember
Prior inconsistent statement by a testifying witness given under oath at a prior proceeding (e.g. grand jury, trial, deposition) is NOT HEARSAY.
Remember: A prior inconsistent statement must be RELEVANT to the case
Prior Consistent Statement + Timing
Prior consistent statements generally cannot be used, UNLESS it is to rebut a charge of improper motive or to rehabilitate.
Timing: Prior consistent statement must be made BEFORE the alleged undue influence.