Evidence Set #3 Flashcards
What are the three sources of evidence law?
(i) state common law and miscellaneous state statutes, (ii) comprehensive state evidence codes, and (iii) the Federal Rules of Evidence
What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?
Direct evidence involves no inferences. It is testimony or real evidence that speaks directly to a material issue in the case. Circumstantial evidence is indirect and relies on inference. It is evidence of a subsidiary or collateral fact from which, alone or in conjunction with other facts, the existence of the material issue can be inferred.
Under what circumstance must a court exclude evidence entirely?
If the court determines that, even with a limiting instruction, the probative value of the evidence with respect to its legitimate purpose would be substantially outweighed by danger of unfair prejudice with respect to its incompetent purpose
Relevance Questions should be approached in what two steps?
1) Determine whether the evidence is relevant (i.e., tends to prove or disprove a material fact) 2) If relevant, determine whether the evidence should nonetheless be excluded based on: (i) judicial discretion (i.e., probative value outweighed by prejudice, etc.), or (ii) public policy (e.g., insurance, subsequent repairs)
When is evidence relevant?
Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make the existence of any fact of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence
What is the general rule of relevance?
Generally, the evidence must relate to the time, event, or person involved in the present litigation; otherwise, it is not relevant. (An important factor is its proximity in time to the current events).
Will previous similar occurrences be relevant? When?
Yes previous similar occurrences may be relevant if they are probative of a material issue and that probativeness outweighs the risk of confusion or unfair prejudice.
What are nine ways in which similar occurrences can be relevant to the immediate occurrence at issue?
1) Causation - (e.g., damage to nearby homes caused by D’s blasting is relevant to prove D’s blasting damaged P’s home). 2) Prior False Claims or Same Bodily Injury - while evidence that a person has previously filed similar tort claims or has been involved in prior accidents is generally inadmissible to show the invalidity of the present claim, it is usually relevant to prove that: (i) the present claim is likely to be false, or (ii) the plaintiff’s condition is attributable in whole or in part to the prior injury. 3) Similar Accidents or Injuries Caused by Same Event or Condition - admissible to prove: (i) the existence of a dangerous condition, (ii) that the defendant had knowledge of the dangerous condition, and (iii) that the dangerous condition was the cause of the present injury 4) Previous Similar Acts Admissible to Prove Intent - (e.g., history of school segregation admissible to show motive for current exclusion of minorities) 5) Rebutting Claim of Impossibility - (e.g., defendant’s claim that car will not go above 50 mph can be rebutted by showing occasions when car went more than 50 mph) 6) Sales of Similar Property 7) Habit - Habit describes a person’s regular response to a specific set of circumstances and is admissible only to corroborate other evidence that shows the habit occurred at the relevant time. Note: watch for words such as “instinctively” and “automatically” in a question’s fact pattern. These words indicate habit. 8) Industrial or Business Routine - allows uncorroborated evidence of the routine practice of an organization to prove that the organization acted in accordance with the routine practice 9) Industry Custom as Evidence of Standard of Care - to show adherence to or deviance from an industry-wide standard of care
What is the scope of the trial judge’s discretion to limit relevant evidence?
A trial judge has broad discretion to exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence
What are six types of evidence excluded for public policy reasons?
1) Liability Insurance - evidence of insurance against liability is not admissible to show negligence or ability to pay. However, it may be admissible: (i) to prove ownership or control, (ii) to impeach, or (iii) as part of an admission of liability. 2) Subsequent Remedial Measures - Not admissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product or its design, or a need for a warning or instruction. However, it may be admissible to: (i) prove ownership or control, (ii) rebut a claim that the precaution was not feasible, or (iii) prove that the opposing party has destroyed evidence. 3) Settlement Offers - Not admissible to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim, or to impeach a witness by prior inconsistent statement or contradiction. Conduct or statements made in the course of negotiating a compromise–including direct admissions of liability–are also inadmissible for these purposes. There is a limited exception for conduct or statements made during compromise negotiations regarding a civil dispute with a governmental regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority which is not excluded when offered in a criminal case. 4) Offer to Pay Medical Expenses - However, unlike the situation with compromise negotiations, admissions of fact accompanying offers to pay medical expenses are admissible. 5) Withdrawn Guilty Pleas - this includes pleas of nolo contendere and offers to plead guilty 6) Expressions of Sympathy - In a Florida civil case, that portion of a statement, writing, or benevolent gesture that expresses sympathy or a general sense of benevolence relating to the pain, suffering, or death of a person involved in an accident and made to that person or the family of that person is inadmissible. However, a statement of fault that is part of, or in addition to, any of the above will be admissible in evidence.
Character evidence may be offered as substantive, rather than impeachment, evidence for what two things?
(i) prove character when it is the ultimate issue in the case, or (ii) serve as circumstantial evidence of how a person probably acted
How is character proved by opinion testimony?
In Florida character cannot be proved by opinion testimony
To what degree is character evidence admissible in civil cases?
Unless character is directly in issue (e.g., defamation), evidence of character offered by either party to prove the conduct of a person in the litigated event is generally not admissible in a civil case. For example, a plaintiff in a suit involving a car accident may not introduce evidence that the defendant is usually a reckless driver to prove that she was negligent at the time in question, nor may the defendant introduce evidence that she is generally a cautious driver.
Who may initiate evidence of character in a criminal case?
The prosecution cannot initiate evidence of bad character of the defendant merely to show that she is more likely to have committed the crime. (Although the prosecution may introduce evidence of prior misconduct for reasons other than propensity to commit the crime). The accused, however, may introduce evidence of her good character to show her innocence of the alleged crime.
to what extent may a criminal defendant prove character?
Florida restricts the defendant’s witness to reputation evidence to prove the defendant’s character. Opinion testimony is not allowed
to what extent may the prosecution rebut a criminal defendant’s character evidence?
In Florida, witnesses may testify to the defendant’s bad reputation, but they may not give their own opinion of the defendant’s character
to what extent may a victim’s character be proved in a criminal case?
In Florida, the victim’s character cannot be proved by opinion testimony
What is the rule on character evidence regarding a rape victim’s past behavior?
The Florida rape shield statute applies to criminal sexual battery and human trafficking prosecution only. It prohibits reputation evidence relating to a victim’s prior sexual conduct. It also limits the admissibility of evidence of specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity between the victim and persons other than the defendant; however, such evidence may be admitted after an in camera proceeding if: (1) it tends to prove that the defendant was not the source of the semen, pregnancy, injury, or disease; or (2) there is a similar pattern of conduct by the victim that tends to establish consent.
When is evidence of specific acts of misconduct admissible?
Evidence of other crimes or misconduct is admissible if relevant to some issue other than the defendant’s character or disposition to commit the crime charged. Such issues include motive (e.g., burn building to hide embezzlement), intent (e.g, guilty knowledge, lack of good faith), absence of mistake or accident, identity (e.g., stolen gun used or “signature” crimes), or common plan or scheme. In a criminal case, the prosecution must, upon request, provide reasonable notice prior to trial of the general nature of any of this type of evidence it intends to introduce. In Florida, prosecution must give 10 days’ notice of intent to use other acts of evidence (regardless of whether the defendant requested notice).
What is the standard of admissibility for specific acts of misconduct (regarding character evidence) to be admissible
In Florida, to be admissible, similar acts must be strikingly similar and share some unique characteristic or combination of characteristics that set them apart.
For character evidence, are prior acts of sexual assault or child molestation admissible for character evidence?
In Florida, evidence of a defendant’s prior acts of sexual assault or child molestation is admissible only in criminal cases where the defendant is accused of committing the same type of act. (For the purposes of this rule, “child molestation” refers to prohibited sexual conduct against a person 16 years old or younger.) If admissible, such evidence may be considered for its bearing on any matter as to which it is relevant.
What are the facts appropriate for judicial notice?
Courts take judicial notice of indisputable facts that are either matters of common knowledge in the community (notorious facts) or capable of verification by resort to easily accessible sources of unquestionable accuracy (manifest facts). Courts have increasingly taken judicial notice of scientific principles as a type of manifest fact.
For judicial notice to be mandatory, Florida requires that the resting party do what two things?
(1) provide each adverse party with timely written notice of the request; and (2) file proof of such notice with the court
A Florida court must take judicial notice of what three things?
(1) Decisional, constitutional, and public statutory law and resolutions of the Florida Legislature and the Congress of the US. (2) Florida rules of court that have statewide application, its own rules, and the rules of the US courts adopted by the US S Ct. (3) Rules of court of the US S Ct and of the US Ct of App
May judicial notice be taken for the first time on appeal?
Yes
Are judicially noticed facts always conclusive?
In Florida, the court has discretion to determine whether judicial notice of a fact is conclusive. If such a finding is made, the jury is instructed to accept the fact as judicially noticed
What are the 13 Permissive Judicial Notices of Law?
A Florida court may take judicial notice of: (1) Special, local, and private acts and resolutions of the US Congress and of the FL Legislature (2) Decisional, constitutional, and public statutory law of every other state, territory, and jurisdiction of the US. (3) Contents of the Federal Register (4) Laws of foreign nations and of an organization of nations (5) Official actions of the legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the US and of any state, territory, or jurisdiction of the US (6) Records of any court of this state or of any court of records of the US or of any state, territory, or jurisdiction of the US. (7) Rules of court of any court of the US or of any state, territory, or jurisdiction of the US. (8) Provisions of all municipal and county charters and charter amendments of this state, provided they are available in printed or as certified copies. (9) Rules promulgated by governmental agencies of this state which are published in the FL Administrative Code or in bound written copies (10) Duly enacted ordinances and resolutions of municipalities and counties located in Florida, provided such ordinances and resolutions are available in printed copies or as certified copies. (11) Facts that are no subject to dispute because they are generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the court (12) Facts that are not subject to dispute because they are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned (13) Official seals of governmental agencies and departments of the US and of any state, territory, or jurisdiction of the US
What is real evidence?
Real or demonstrative evidence is actual physical evidence addressed directly to the trier of fact. Real evidence may be direct, circumstantial, original, or prepared (demonstrative)
What are the four requirements of admissibility for real evidence?
Real evidence must be relevant and meet the following legal requirements: Authentication - the object must be identified as what the proponent claims it to be, either by testimony of a witness that she recognizes the object as what the proponent claims it is; or evidence that the object has been held in a substantially unbroken chain of possession. Condition of Object - If the condition of the object is significant, it must be shown to be in substantially the same condition at trial Balancing Test–Legal Relevance - Some auxiliary policy or principle may outweigh the need to admit the real evidence. Such policies include physical inconvenience of bringing the object into the courtroom, indecency or impropriety, or undue prejudice
When is exhibition of a child allowed as real evidence?
In paternity suits, almost all courts permit exhibition of the child to show whether she is the race of the putative father. The courts are divided with respect to the propriety of exhibition for the purpose of proving physical resemblance to the putative father.
When are reproductions or other explanatory real evidence allowed?
Relevant photographs, diagram, maps, or other reproductions are admissible if their value is not outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. However, items used entirely for explanatory purposes are permitted at a trial, but are not usually admitted into evidence (i.e., they are not given to the jury during its deliberations)
When are maps, charts, models, etc. allowed as real evidence?
Usually admissible for the purpose of illustrating testimony, but must be authenticated (testimonial evidence that they are faithful reproductions of the object or thing depicted)
When are demonstrations as real evidence allowed?
The court, in its discretion, may permit experiments or demonstrations to be performed in the courtroom. An experiment must be performed under conditions that are substantially similar to those attending the original event. Demonstrations of bodily injury may not be allowed where the demonstrations would unduly dramatize the injury
When are exhibition of injuries allowed as real evidence?
Exhibition of injuries in a personal injury or criminal case is generally permitted, but the court has discretion to exclude this evidence if unfair prejudice would result.
When is a jury view of the scene allowed as real evidence?
The trial court has discretion to permit the jury to view places at issue in a civil or criminal case. The need for the view and changes in the condition of the premises are relevant considerations here.
When is the general rule on admissibility of documentary evidence?
Documentary evidence must be relevant in order to be admissible. In the case of writings, the authenticity of the document is one aspect of its relevancy.
What is the level of proof needed for authentication of documentary evidence?
As a general rule, a writing or any secondary evidence of its content will not be received in evidence unless the writing is authenticated by proof that shows that the writing is what the proponent claims it is. The proof must be sufficient to support a jury finding of genuineness.
What are 7 examples of proper authentication of documentary evidence?
(a) Admissions - a writing may be authenticated by evidence that the party against whom it is offered has either admitted its authenticity or acted upon it as authentic. (b) Eyewitness Testimony - A writing can be authenticated by testimony of one who sees it executed or hears it acknowledged. The testimony need not be given by a subscribing witness (c) Handwriting Verifications - This evidence may be the opinion of a nonexpert with personal knowledge of the alleged writer’s handwriting or the opinion of an expert who has compared the writing to samples of the maker’s handwriting. Genuineness may also be determined by the trier of fact through comparison of samples. (d) Ancient Documents - by evidence that is at least 20 years old; is in such condition as to be free from suspicion as to its authenticity; and was found in a place where such a writing would likely be kept (e) Reply Letter Doctrine - A writing may be authenticated by evidence that it was written in response to a communication sent to the claimed author. (f) Photographs - Generally admissible only if identified by a witness as a portrayal of certain facts relevant to the issue and verified by the witness as a correct representation of those facts. If a photo is taken when no person who could authenticate the scene is present, the photo may be admitted upon a showing that the camera was properly operating at the relevant time and that the photograph was developed from film obtained from that camera. (g) X-Ray Pictures, Electrocardiograms, Etc. - Unlike photos, an X-ray cannot be authenticated by testimony of a witness that it is a correct representation of the facts. It must be shown that the process used is accurate, the machine was in working order, and the operator was qualified to operate it. Finally, a custodial chain must be established to assure that the X-ray has not been tampered with.
By one of what four methods may statements made during a telephone conversation be authenticated?
By one of the parties to the call who testifies that: (i) he recognized the other party’s voice; (ii) the speaker had knowledge of certain facts that only a particular person would have; (iii) he called a particular person’s number a voice answered as that person or that person’s residence; or (iv) he called a business and talked with the person answering the phone about matters relevant to the business.
What are 9 self-authenticating documents (extrinsic evidence of authenticity is not required):
(i) domestic public documents bearing a seal, (ii) similar official foreign public documents, (iii) certified copies of public records, (iv) official publications, (v) newspapers and periodicals, (vi) trade inscriptions, (vii) acknowledged documents, (viii) commercial paper and related documents, and (ix) business records, electronically generated records, and data copied from an electronic device, if the records are certified and the proponent gives the adverse party reasonable written notice and an opportunity for inspection.
What is the best evidence rule?
More accurately called the “original document rule,” to prove the terms of a writing (including a recording, photograph, or X-ray), the original writing must be produced if the terms of the writing are material. Secondary evidence of the writing (e.g., oral testimony) is admissible only if the original is unavailable.
Two what two classes of situations does the best evidence rule apply?
namely where: (i) the writing is a legally operative or dispositive instrument; or (ii) the knowledge of a witness concerning a fact results from having read it in the document.
The best evidence rule does not apply in what four circumstances?
Fact to be Proved Exists Independently of Writing - The rule does not apply where the fact to be proved has an existence independent of any writing. Many writings record details of essentially nonwritten transactions. Oral testimony of these facts may be given without the original writings recording the event. Writing is Collateral to Litigated Issue - The rule does not apply where the writing is of minor importance (i.e., collateral) to the matter in controversy Summaries of Voluminous Records - The rule does not apply to summaries of voluminous records. It would be inconvenient to examine a voluminous collection of writings in court, and so the proponent may present their contents in the form of a chart or summary. Public Records - The rule does not apply to copies of public records that are certified as correct or testified to as correct.
For purposes of the best evidence rule, are copies treated the same as originals?
It is important to distinguish photocopies and copies made by hand. Photocopies are duplicates and, thus, are treated the same as originals. In contrast, handwritten copies are considered secondary evidence and are admissible only if the original or a duplicate is unavailable
When, if ever, may secondary evidence (handwritten copies, notes, oral testimony) of an original writing’s contents be produced in court?
If a satisfactory explanation is given for the nonproduction of the original
What are the three valid excuses justifying the admissibility of secondary evidence in bypassing the best evidence rule?
1) loss or destruction of the original 2) the original is in possession of a third party outside the jurisdiction and is unobtainable 3) the original is in the possession of an adversary who, after due notice, fails to produce the original.
What are the roles of the court and of the jury in determining admissibility of duplicates, other copies, and oral testimony as to the contents of an original?
Ordinarily it is for the court to make determinations of fact regarding admissibility of duplicates, other copies, and oral testimony as to the contents of an original. However, the Fed Rules reserve the following questions of preliminary fact for the jury: Whether the original ever existed; Whether a writing, recording, or photograph produced at trial is an original; and Whether the evidence offered correctly reflects the contents of the original
What is the general rule of competency of witnesses and what are the four basic testimonial attributes?
Witnesses must past tests of basic reliability to establish their competency to give testimony, but they are generally presumed to be competent until the contrary is established. Witnesses must possess to some degree four basic testimonial attributes: the capacity to observe, to recollect, to communicate, and to appreciate the obligation to speak truthfully
The Fed Rules do not specify any mental or moral qualifications for witness testimony beyond these two limitations
(i) there must be evidence sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter about which he is to testify (note that proof of personal knowledge may consist of the witness’s own testimony); and (ii) the witness must declare he will testify truthfully Note: If a witness requires an interpreter, the interpreter must be qualified and take an oath to make a true translation
What is the rule for competency as it relates to infancy
The competency of an infant depends on the capacity and intelligence of the particular child as determined by the trial judge
What is the rule for competency as it relates to insanity?
an insane person may testify, provided he understands the obligation to speak truthfully and has the capacity to testify accurately
What is the rule for competency as it relates to judges and jurors?
The presiding judge may not testify as a witness. Likewise, jurors are incompetent to testify before the jury in which they are sitting.
During an inquiry into the validity of a verdict or indictment, what is a juror generally allowed and not allowed to testify about?
A juror is generally prohibited from testifying about what occurred during deliberations or about anything that may have affected a juror’s vote, and the court may not receive evidence of a juror’s statement on such matters. However, a juror may testify as to: (a) whether any extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury’s attention; (b) whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear on any juror; (c) whether there is a mistake on the verdict form; or (d) whether any juror made a clear statement that he relied on racial stereotypes or animus to convict a criminal defendant. Note that not every comment indicating racial bias will qualify; the court must find that racial animus was a significant motivating factor in the juror’s vote to convict.
What are the two categories of competency of hypnotic testimony and what is the basis of admissibility of each?
Testimony based on independent recollection: testimony is admissible when (1) a witness provides a description of a suspect at the time of the crime, (2) the information elicited from a subsequent hypnotic session is consistent with that previous description, and (3) the witness testifies in court based on an independent recollection of the event. Note that the fact that hypnosis took place goes to the weigh, not the admissibility, of the testimony Hypnotically refreshed testimony: testimony based on a memory refreshed or enhanced through hypnosis is inadmissible per se in a criminal trial. Moreover, a witness cannot testify to any new matter discovered through hypnosis. However, hypnosis does not render a witness incompetent to testify to a fact recalled prior to hypnosis if the fact is properly recorded. Exception: the hypnotically refreshed testimony of a criminal defendant might be admissible, provided the prosecution was given reasonable notice of the hypnosis session and the session was recorded to ensure compliance with proper procedures and practices.
The judge may exercise reasonable control over the examination of witnesses for what three reasons?
to aid the ascertainment of truth, to avoid wasting time, and to protect witnesses from harassment
What is the rule on leading questions?
leading questions (i.e., questions that suggest the answer desired) are generally improper on direct examination. However, they are permitted: a. on cross examination; b. to elicit preliminary or introductory matter; c. when the witness needs aid to respond because of loss of memory, immaturity, or physical or mental weakness; or d. when the witness is hostile
What are the types of questions that are improper during examination of witnesses?
questions that are misleading (cannot be answered without making an unintended admission), compound (requiring a single answer to more than one question), argumentative, conclusionary, cumulative, unduly harassing or embarrassing, call for a narrative answer or speculation, or assume facts not in evidence are improper and are not permitted
What are the types of answers that are improper during examination of witnesses?
Answers that lack foundation (the witness has insufficient personal knowledge) and answers that are nonresponsive (do not answer the specific question asked) may be stricken
When may a use of memoranda by a witness during examination of a witness be used and not be used?
A witness cannot read her testimony from a prepared memorandum. However, a memorandum may be used in certain circumstances. But there is distinguishment between present recollection revived–refreshing recollection and past recollection recorded–recorded recollection
What are the rules for use by a witness of any writing or thing for the purpose of refreshing her present recollection
A witness may use any writing or thing for the purpose of refreshing her present recollection. She usually may not read from the writing while she actually testifies because the writing is not authenticated and not in evidence (and thus, there is no hearsay concern).
When a witness uses a writing or thing for the purpose of refreshing her present recollection while on the stand, what is the adverse party entitled to?
The adverse party is entitled to have the writing produced at trial, cross-examine the witness thereon, and introduce portions relating to the witness’s testimony into evidence. If the witness refreshed her memory before taking the stand, an adverse party is entitled to such production and inspection only if the court decides that justice requires it.
What are the rules for use by a witness of any writing or thing for the purpose of remembering when the witness states that she has insufficient recollection of an event to enable her to testify fully and accurately, even after she has consulted a memorandum or other record given to her on the stand? (What five things are required for the foundation)
The record itself may be read into evidence if a proper foundation is laid. The foundation must include proof that: 1) the witness at one time had personal knowledge of the facts in the record; 2) the record was made by the witness or under her direction, or it was adopted by the witness; 3) the record was timely made when the matter was fresh in the witness’s mind; 4) the record accurately reflects the witness’s knowledge (i.e., witness testifies that it was accurate when made); and 5) the witness has insufficient recollection to testify fully and accurately. Note however that although the record may be read into evidence and heard by the jury, it cannot be admitted into evidence as an exhibit unless offered by an adverse party. This tends to come up on the bar exam.
What is the general policy of the law on the admissibility of opinion testimony?
The general policy of the law is to prohibit admissibility of opinion evidence except in cases where the courts are sure that it will be necessary or at least helpful
When is opinion by lay witnesses admissible? (3 conditions to be met)
In Florida, lay opinion is admissible when: (1) the witness cannot readily, and with equal accuracy and adequacy, communicate what he has perceived to the trier of fact without testifying in the form of opinions; (2) the testimony will not mislead the trier of fact; and (3) the opinions do not require special knowledge or training
The opinion of a lay witness is generally admissible with respect to what 8 specific things?
1) the general appearance or condition of a person; 2) the state of emotion of a person; 3) matters involving a sense recognition; 4) voice or handwriting identification; 5) the speed of a moving object; 6) the value of his own services; 7) the rational or irrational nature of another’s conduct; and 8) intoxication of another
Are opinions of lay witnesses admissible with regard to whether one acted as an agent or whether an agreement was made?
No