EVIDENCE LAW Flashcards
Logical Relevance
EI LR IT2MMFOC <> PTIWBWE
Rule Statement:
Evidence is logically relevant if it has any tendency to make a material fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
Any Tendency:
The evidence need not conclusively prove the fact, but it must have some tendency to support or undermine it.
Material Fact of Consequence:
The fact must be significant to the outcome of the case.
More or Less Probable:
The evidence must affect the likelihood of the fact in question.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Misunderstanding Relevance:
Questions might suggest evidence is irrelevant without considering its tendency to affect a material fact. Ensure any tendency is considered.
Materiality:
Fact patterns may overlook whether the fact is material. Confirm the fact’s significance to the case outcome.
Probative Value:
Scenarios might ignore how the evidence makes a fact more or less probable. Verify the evidence’s impact on the likelihood of the fact.
Hearsay Exceptions: Present Sense Impression
ASDEOC MWDPOIAIA
Rule Statement:
A statement describing an event or condition made while the declarant perceived it or immediately after is admissible.
Event or Condition:
The statement must describe or explain an event or condition.
Declarant Perceived It:
The declarant must have made the statement while perceiving the event or condition.
Immediately After:
The statement is admissible if it was made immediately after the declarant perceived the event or condition.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Timing of the Statement:
Questions might ignore the requirement for the statement to be made while perceiving the event or immediately after. Ensure the timing is correct.
Nature of the Statement:
Fact patterns may overlook that the statement must describe an event or condition. Confirm the statement’s content is appropriate.
Declarant’s Perception:
Scenarios might imply the declarant did not actually perceive the event or condition. Verify that the declarant directly perceived what is described.
Hearsay
OOCS O4TOTMA IUEA
Rule Statement:
Hearsay is an out of court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted. Hearsay is inadmissible unless an exception applies.
Out of Court Statement Offered for the Truth of the Matter Asserted:
A statement made outside of the current court proceeding that is presented to prove the truth of what it asserts.
Inadmissible Unless an Exception Applies:
Such statements are generally not allowed as evidence unless they fall under a recognized exception.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Misidentifying Hearsay:
Questions might incorrectly identify statements as hearsay. Ensure the statement is offered for its truth and made out of court.
Overlooking Exceptions:
Fact patterns may ignore exceptions that permit hearsay. Verify if any exceptions apply.
Confusing Purpose:
Scenarios might confuse the purpose of the statement, suggesting it’s not hearsay. Confirm if the statement is indeed offered for its truth.
Hearsay Exceptions: Excited Utterance
A statement relating to a startling event or condition is admissible when made while the declarant is still under the stress or excitement caused by the event or condition.
Startling Event or Condition:
The statement must relate to an event or condition that is startling or shocking.
Still Under:
The declarant must still be under the influence of the event or condition when making the statement.
Stress or Excitement:
The statement must be made while the declarant is experiencing stress or excitement from the event or condition.
Event or Condition:
The stress or excitement must be caused by the specific event or condition being described.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Timing of the Statement:
Questions might ignore the requirement that the declarant must still be under the stress or excitement of the event. Ensure the timing is correct.
Nature of the Statement:
Fact patterns may overlook that the statement must relate to the startling event or condition. Confirm the statement’s content is appropriate.
Declarant’s Condition:
Scenarios might imply the declarant was no longer under stress or excitement. Verify that the declarant was still influenced by the event or condition.
Hearsay Exceptions: State of Mind
ASODTP
Rule Statement:
A statement of the declarant’s then existing physical condition, state of mind, emotion, or sensation is admissible.
Declarant’s Then Existing:
The statement must pertain to the declarant’s condition at the time the statement was made.
Physical Condition:
Statements about the declarant’s physical condition (e.g., pain, health status).
State of Mind:
Statements about the declarant’s mental condition (e.g., intent, plan, motive).
Emotion:
Statements about the declarant’s feelings (e.g., fear, anger, joy).
Sensation:
Statements about the declarant’s sensory experiences (e.g., feeling cold, hot, etc.).
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Current vs. Past Condition:
Questions might ignore that the statement must describe the declarant’s condition at the time it was made, not a past condition.
Nature of the Statement:
Fact patterns may overlook that the statement must describe a physical condition, state of mind, emotion, or sensation. Confirm the statement’s content is appropriate.
Declarant’s Identity:
Scenarios might misinterpret the declarant’s statement about someone else’s condition. Verify the statement pertains to the declarant’s own condition.
Hearsay Exceptions: Statement Against Interest
SONUAW WIAPPPI WMIA
Rule Statement:
The statement of a now unavailable witness which is against his penal, pecuniary, or proprietary interest when made is admissible.
Unavailable Witness:
The person who made the statement must be unavailable to testify at the trial.
Against Interest:
The statement must be contrary to the declarant’s own interest.
Penal Interest:
Statements that would subject the declarant to criminal liability.
Pecuniary Interest:
Statements that would have financial consequences for the declarant.
Proprietary Interest:
Statements that would affect the declarant’s property rights.
When Made:
The statement must have been against the declarant’s interest at the time it was made.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Witness Availability:
Questions might overlook the requirement that the declarant must be unavailable. Ensure the witness cannot testify.
Against Interest:
Fact patterns may ignore whether the statement was actually against the declarant’s interest. Confirm the adverse nature of the statement.
Timing of the Statement:
Scenarios might misinterpret the timing, suggesting the statement must be currently against interest. Verify the statement was against interest when made.
Non-Hearsay: Admission of a Party Opponent
AOPO SMOR TA2PABPO ORFUAH ANH
Rule Statement:
Admission of a Party Opponent:
A statement made, or an act that admits to prior acknowledgement, by a party opponent of one of the relevant facts which is now being used against him is admissible non-hearsay.
Statement Made or Act:
The admission can be a verbal statement or a physical act.
Admits to Prior Acknowledgement:
The statement or act acknowledges a fact relevant to the case.
Party Opponent:
The statement is made by the opposing party in the case.
Relevant Facts:
The admission pertains to facts that are significant to the issues in the case.
Used Against Him:
The admission is being used as evidence against the party who made the statement or act.
Statement Offered for Another Purpose:
Statements offered for a purpose other than showing the truth of the matter asserted are admissible non-hearsay.
Purpose Other Than Showing the Truth:
Statements that are used to show something other than the truth of their content, such as to show the declarant’s state of mind, effect on the listener, or as verbal acts, are admissible.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Purpose of the Statement:
Questions might suggest that statements are always hearsay. Verify if the statement is offered for a non-hearsay purpose.
Party Opponent Admissions:
Fact patterns may overlook that admissions by a party opponent are non-hearsay. Confirm the statement or act is by the opposing party and is relevant.
Effect on the Listener:
Scenarios might ignore statements offered to show their effect on the listener. Ensure such statements are recognized as non-hearsay.
Authentication
2BA AWMBA FMBL2SWIWIP2B
Rule Statement:
To be admissible, all writings must be authenticated. Foundation must be laid to show that the writing is what it purports to be.
Writings:
Documents or recorded information that are offered as evidence.
Authenticated:
The process of proving that a writing is genuine and what it claims to be.
Writing is What it Purports to Be:
The evidence must be shown to be authentic and trustworthy, accurately representing its claimed origin or authorship.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Foundation Requirement:
Questions might overlook the need for laying a proper foundation. Ensure there is adequate evidence to support authentication.
Assumption of Authenticity:
Fact patterns may suggest that writings are automatically admissible. Confirm that authentication has been established.
Authentication Methods:
Scenarios might ignore various methods of authentication, such as witness testimony, expert comparison, or distinctive characteristics. Verify appropriate methods are used.
Lay Witness
LOAAI RBOP HTTTOF + NBOSTOOSK
Rule Statement:
Lay opinions are admissible if (1) rationally based on perception, (2) helpful to the trier of fact, and (3) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge.
Rationally Based on Perception:
The opinion must be grounded in the witness’s own perceptions and observations.
Helpful to the Trier of Fact:
The opinion must assist the judge or jury in understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue.
Not Based on Scientific, Technical, or Other Specialized Knowledge:
The opinion must not require expertise beyond that of an average person; it should not rely on specialized knowledge.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Perception Basis:
Questions might suggest opinions are admissible without being based on the witness’s perception. Ensure the opinion is grounded in direct observation.
Helpfulness to Trier of Fact:
Fact patterns may overlook whether the opinion aids the trier of fact. Confirm that the opinion is useful in understanding evidence or determining facts.
Specialized Knowledge:
Scenarios might ignore the prohibition against lay opinions based on specialized knowledge. Verify that the opinion does not require scientific, technical, or other expert knowledge.
Best Evidence Rule
PS2PCOAW ME POR O A
Rule Statement:
The party seeking to prove the contents of a writing must either produce the original or account for its absence.
Contents:
The specific information contained in a document or writing.
Writing:
Any recorded information, including documents, recordings, or photographs.
Produce:
To present the original document in court as evidence.
Original:
The actual document or writing itself, or an exact duplicate.
Account for its Absence:
Provide a valid reason for why the original cannot be produced and show that a reliable alternative is being used.
Common Tricks on the Exam:
Original Requirement:
Questions might overlook the need to produce the original document. Ensure the original is presented or its absence is properly accounted for.
Absence Justification:
Fact patterns may ignore the necessity to explain the absence of the original. Confirm there is a valid reason for not producing the original.
Exact Duplicate:
Scenarios might misinterpret acceptable substitutes for the original. Verify that any duplicate or secondary evidence is reliable and admissible.
