Evidence Flashcards
Testifying criminal D proving character
May testify to specific acts to establish his good character
Criminal D’s prior gang activity
Where D is accused of conducting or participating in criminal gang activity, evidence of D’s commission of criminal gang activity is admissible and may be considered on any matter to which it is relevant
Jury view of scene
The view is not evidence; only to help the jury better understand the evidence.
Polygraph tests
Admissible only pursuant to stipulation by D and by the state
Authentication of photo
Admissible over an authentication objection despite unavailability of the authenticating witness if the court determines that the item tends to show reliably the facts for which it is offered.
Unattended camera or recording device
Admitted if (1) the court determines it tends to show reliably the facts for which it is offered and (2) it has a time stamp.
Competency – infants
Any case involving a dependent child (i.e., one without proper parental care) and in any criminal case in which a child was a victim of or witness to a crime, the child is competent to testify even if he does not understand the nature of the oath. Still subject to competency challenge on other grounds (e.g., lack of use of reason because of intellectual disability).
Use of memo by a witness – use in cross-examination
Neither the attorney/client privilege nor attorney work product protection are waived by using covered materials to prepare a witness before the witness takes the stand. Thus, the judge cannot order the disclosure of such materials.
Lay witness opinion – value of land
Permissible so long as the opinion is reasoned
Expert opinion testimony – relevance
Criminal case: admissible on any question of science, skill, trade, or like question; judge determines whether a particular procedure or technique has reached a scientific stage of verifiable certainty
Civil case: apply the FRE
Expert qualification –professional malpractice
Expert testifying to standard of care must be licensed to practice in the state in which he was practicing or teaching at the time of the alleged act or omission.
Med mal: expert must have also actively practiced or taught for at least 3/5 years prior with sufficient frequency to establish an appropriate level of knowledge relative to the procedure or treatment at issue
Prior inconsistent statements – foundation for extrinsic evidence & effect
Not admissible unless the witness is FIRST given opportunity to explain or deny the statement
Admissible as substantive evidence and for impeachment
Conviction of crime –pleas
Cannot impeach a witness based on a nolo contendere plea
Testimonial privileges
(1) Attorney/client
(2) Marital communications
(3) Communications among grand jurors
(4) State secrets
(5) Psychiatrist/patient
(6) Psychologist/patient
(7) Social worker/client
(8) Communications among professionals about client
Comment on privilege
Criminal case: party’s assertion of privilege may not be used against them
Civil case: party’s assertion of privilege may be used by the trier of fact to draw a negative inference against the party