lecture 1

Question 1

jurisdiction (exclusive & concurrent)

Answer 1

area where court system has authority
jurisdiction for crime that occurs anywhere in MD belongs to district of MD

Question 2

venue

Answer 2

“room where it happens” courtroom
MD has Greenbelt (5 southern counties) & Baltimore (everything else)

Question 3

constitutional underpinnings to criminal justice

evidence collection

Answer 3

evidence must be collected through constitutional means
- good evidence proves criminal conduct occurred and won’t lose trial/motion due to unconstitutionality

Question 4

Banks & FBI

Answer 4

FBI looks for CTR for anything <$10,000
- conduct SARs

Question 5

role of the federal prosecutor

Answer 5

enforce federal criminal law as it touches on MD district & can do any case in the state
- MD has 94 districts
they can work on cases that involve criminal conduct that did not all happen in MD so long as some of it happens in MD

Question 6

role of the defense counsel

Answer 6

legal aid for the defense paid by judiciary branch for indigent defendants

Question 7

investigation

David’s definition

Answer 7

collection of incriminating evidence
4th amendment issue - illegal search & seizure

Question 8

sources of evidence (5)

Answer 8

• documents
• testimonies
• forensics
• physical evidence
• electronic evidence (no current AI/deepfake laws for CP)

Question 9

federal rules of evidence

Answer 9

• evidence must be admissable (basic requirement is evidence & rules favor admissibility)
• judge rules on prelim matters of admissibility & legal questions
• jury decides weight of evidence
• open file discovery - turning over EVERYTHING to defense
• rule 16 - federal rule of criminal procedure

Question 10

brady - exculpatory (fre:bc)

Answer 10

any evidence that can show evidence (true or lie) needs to be turned over

Question 11

giglio - impeachment information (fre:bc)

Answer 11

something that can make a witness look less credible (history of perjury, plea agreement)

Question 12

jencks (fre:bc)

Answer 12

turn over prior testimony about the same subject matter you talk about at trial at the end of witness’ direct testimony
judges typically rule to turn over jancks before trial to prepare defense
only for information relevant to testimony but some prosecutors turn over everything

Question 13

rules requiring ordering of proof (fre:bc)

trial process

Answer 13

• govt. has burden of proof
• case in chief ➔ defense case ➔ rebuttal
  – direct then cross
  direct: non-leading questions
  cross: leading used to create doubt

Question 14

types of evidence (fre:bc)

Answer 14

• direct v. circumstantial
• real (tangible)
• demonstrative - used to show how something works (OJ reenactment)
• testimony - typically direct

Question 15

real & demonstrative evidence (fre:bc)

Answer 15

must make identifiable & authenticate
- prove it is what you say it is, typically chain of custody
- in federal system, authentication can be imperfect
- things like voices & handwriting can be authenticated with expert & lay evidence
- some things are self-authenticating (NYT article)

Question 16

admissibility of testimony (fre:bc)

causes for concern

Answer 16

relevance
hearsay
priveledge
issues of character of witness testifying
bias - past conduct, drug use, etc.

Question 17

hearsay (fre:bc)

Answer 17

statement made out of court by declarant used to prove the truth of the matter asserted
- defendant’s & co-conspirators’ statements are not hearsay

exceptions
- excited utterance, 911, dying declaration, etc.

problems
- lack of sincerity, embellishment, etc.

Question 18

unfair prejudice - great evidentiary equalizer (fre:bc)

Answer 18

sometimes very inculpatory evidence is unfairly prejudicial and judge will decide whether or not it should even be included (color vs. b&w photos)

Question 19

past conduct (fre:bc)

Answer 19

prosecutor’s best friend, sometimes character proven though past conduct alone is enough for jury to decide

Question 20

experts (fre:bc)

Answer 20

used for handwriting, fingerprints, weapons, forensics, etc.
Daubert dead baby case proved it wasn’t junk science

Question 21

grand vs. petit jury

Answer 21

grand: 23 people who decide if a person should go to trial (has its roots in English law)
petit: trial jury