Intro to Evidence Law

Question 1

Why regulate evidence?

Answer 1

1. ACCURACY: We don’t trust the fact finder
   a. Worry of Accuracy – don’t trust that juries can discount certain evidence or give more weight to certain evidence
2. FAIRNESS Concern – certain types of evidence not fair to allow in or to exclude
   a. Maybe b/c the constitution was violated to get the evidence (search and seizure)
3. EFFICIENCY – Time constraints (relevance requirement)
   a. We want to exert some kind of control on length of trial and quantity of evidence
4. EXTERNALITIES
   a. Idea – concern that reach beyond the trial itself (further interest that we want to abide by – such as constitution)
   b. Serving ideas beyond the trial itself
   c. Such as attorney client privilege
5. LAWYERS’ SELF-INTEREST
   a. Individuals might be afraid to bring suits w/o the FRE which may help to protect their reputation
   b. Cynical view: FRE may be designed to reward the most skilled lawyers…
   c. 1-5 are more neutral principles

Question 2

Evidence Erroneously Admitted – What are Grounds for Reversal on Appeal?

Answer 2

FRE 103

1. There was a specific objection, unless it was patently obvious
2. That was timely made
3. The ground for objection was valid
4. The error in overruling the objection was prejudicial

Question 3

Evidence Erroneously Excluded – What are Grounds for Reversal on Appeal?

Answer 3

FRE 103

1. There is no valid ground for objection
2. An offer of proof was made; and
3. The error in excluding the evidence was prejudicial.

Question 4

What is the rule of relevance and irrelevance?

Answer 4

FRE 402

1. Irrelevant evidence is never admissible;
2. Relevant evidence is admissible subject to other things (rules of federal civil procedure, criminal procedure, Constitutional provisions, etc.)

Question 5

What is relevant evidence?

Answer 5

a. FRE 401: Evidence is relevant if
i. It has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and
ii. The fact is of consequence in determining the action.
b. Look at relationship b/w evidence and what you are trying to prove

Question 6

When can the court exclude relevant evidence?

Answer 6

Rule: Fed. R. Evid. 403: The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following:
• Unfair prejudice (McRae - Not Unfairly Prejudicial - Gruesome Photos, Old Chief - Prejudicial to say nature of previous crime, when onlyrequired to state that D had a prior felony)
• Confusing the issues (Noreiga)
• Misleading the jury (Flitcraft, Abernathy)
• Undue delay
• Wasting time
• Needlessly presenting cumulative evidence (Flitcraft)

Question 7

What is the rule on Limiting Evidence?

Answer 7

If the court admits evidence that is admissible against a party or for a purpose — but not against another party or for another purpose — the court, on timely request, must restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly. Rule 105.

Question 8

What is conditional relevance? Rule and Case?

Answer 8

FRE 104(b)
(b) When the relevance of evidence depends on whether a fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist. The court may admit the proposed evidence on the condition that the proof be introduced later.

Question for judge is whether a reasonable jury could find that the preliminary fact is true.

McNeely: testimony of a conversation with D by a witness who could not identify D was cond. relevant because state provided court with suff proof that D and W had met and that D had changed his looks.