Excluding evidence Flashcards
What is the general rule for excluding evidence (Rule 403)?
Rule 403 - Excludes relevant evidence for prejudice, confusion, waste of time, or other reasons.
• The court may exclude relevantevidenceif its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulativeevidence.
• At the discretion of the court. Is very rarely overturned by an appellate court.
What is undue prejudice?
an undue tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis, commonly, though not necessarily, an emotional one.
What are five factors that frequently influence a judge’s decision to exclude evidence?
- The extent to which the evidence will arouse emotions or irrational prejudice among the jurors.
- The extent to which the jury might overvalue the evidence.
- The strength of the connection between the evidence and the elements of the case.
- Whether the advocate can prove the same facts through less prejudicial or confusing means.
- Whether it would be possible to reduce prejudice or other harm once the evidence is introduced.
What is sanitizing evidence and when can a judge do this?
Judge can “sanitize” evidence that is highly probative but also carries a significant amount of unfair prejudice.
• Redact the evidence in a way that will remove as much unfair prejudice as possible.
What is the rule for subsequent remedial measures?
Rule 407 bars evidence of subsequent remedial measures to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product or design, or a need for warning or instruction.
Only evidence that occurred after the injury is barred.
When can evidence of subsequent remedial measures be introduced?
• Evidence of SRM can be admitted for other purposes including impeachment of a witness, or to prove ownership, control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures (if the defendant disputes any of these).
How must a defendant argue to prevent subsequent remedial measures from being admitted?
the defendant must claim that their actions were reasonable. Must avoid arguing that further precautions were not possible, which will then allow the evidence to be included under feasibility.
What is the rule regarding admittance of compromise or offers to compromise/settle?
Not admissible to prove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to impeach by a prior inconsistent statement:
Furnishing, promising, or offering a settlement.
Conduct or statement made during compromise negotiations about the claim.
*Protects offers to settle, regardless of when they are offered (even a unilateral offer).
Protects anything said (even admissions of guilt) during settlement negotiations.
What are the exceptions to the rule egarding admittance of compromise or offers to compromise/settle?
The court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness’s bias or prejudice, negating a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.
What is the rule regarding evidence of furnishing, promising to pay, or offering to pay medical, hospital, or similar expenses resulting from an injury
Rule 409: Evidence of furnishing, promising to pay, or offering to pay medical, hospital, or similar expenses resulting from an injury is not admissible to prove liability for the injury.
• An admission of guilt could be admissible, however most courts would leave it out, either under Rule 409 or Rue 403 (unduly prejudicial).
• Does not encompass offers to pay lost wages (in the comments)
What is the rule regarding admissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements?
• Offers to plead guilty and statements made by defendants during the plea bargaining process are generally precluded from being introduced as evidence.
• Does not protect statements made by the prosecution.
• Advances the social interest in plea bargains and the policy concern for protecting defendants who participate in the bargaining process.
• Only applies to the defendant on trial.
Rule 410
What are the exceptions to the rule regarding admissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements?
- Any proceeding in which another statement made during the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced, if in fairness the statements ought to be considered together; or [when necessary for completeness]
a. If the defense brings in to evidence a statement from the prosecutor made during plea bargaining, then the prosecutor may bring in a related statement from that same plea bargaining for fairness purposes. - In a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement.
When does plea bargaining occur?
Two part test:
• Defendant had an actual subjective expectation of negotiating a plea
• The expectation was reasonable given the totality of the objective circumstances.
○ Does not occur during interrogation when the prisoner is tempted with promises of “good treatment.”
What factors suggest plea negotiation?
- Involvement of prosecutor
- Involvement of defense attorney
- Charges already filed
- Specific terms discussed
What is the rule regarding admissibility of liability insurance?
Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible to prove whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully.
• injured plaintiffs cannot introduce evidence of the defendant’s liability insurance (or lack thereof), to prove whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully.
• Wants to encourage people to maintain liability insurance.
• Can be admitted for other purposes such as proving a witness’s bias or prejudice, or proving agency, ownership, or control.
Rule 411
