Objections 101 Flashcards
Rule 602
Need for Personal Knowledge Speculation
Lack of foundation
Need for Personal Knowledge: A witness can only testify about a matter if there is sufficient evidence to support a finding that they have personal knowledge of it. This evidence can include the witness’s own testimony.
Speculation: Testimony based on guesswork or assumptions rather than personal knowledge or observation.
Example: Witness A, who was present at the scene, testifies about what they directly observed. This is testimony based on personal knowledge. Witness B, who was not present at the scene, offers an opinion about what might have happened based on rumors they heard. This is speculative testimony.
Response: Courts typically allow testimony based on personal knowledge while excluding speculative testimony to ensure the reliability of evidence presented during legal proceedings.
Rule 702
Rule 702 - Testimony by Expert Witnesses
Definition: Rule 702 allows a witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education to testify in the form of an opinion. However, several conditions must be met for the testimony to be admissible.
Example: In a medical malpractice case, a doctor with extensive experience in the relevant field is called to testify about the standard of care. The doctor’s testimony is based on their specialized knowledge and experience in the medical field.
Conditions for Admissibility:
(a) The expert’s scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge must assist the trier of fact in understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue.
(b) The testimony must be based on sufficient facts or data.
(c) The testimony must be the product of reliable principles and methods.
(d) The expert must have reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.
Response: If the expert witness meets all the conditions outlined in Rule 702, their testimony is admissible and can be considered by the trier of fact. However, if any of the conditions are not met, the testimony may be challenged and possibly excluded.
Rule 701
Rule 701- Opinion Testimony by Lay Witness
Definition: Testimony in the form of an opinion by a non-expert witness must meet specific criteria.
Example: A witness can’t testify that the council members were drunk but she can testify to anything she within her reasonably perception etc observed with her fives sense etc she saw the council members throwing up, heard them slurring their words etc
Response: The opinion must be rationally based on the witness’s perception, helpful to understanding the testimony, and not rely on specialized knowledge.
How to apply: Objection 701 Opinion Testimony by Lay Witness may I be heard
Your honor this exceeding the Testimony in the form of an opinion by a non-expert witness it’s not meeting the specific criteria needed therefore this should not be allowed.
6 This rule does not permit the actual exclusion of students portraying witnesses. Rather, it allows for the constructive exclusion of some witnesses. 7 A party seeking to introduce expert testimony must raise a motion to enter the witness as an expert before the expert opinion can be offered. This should be done after the appropriate 702 foundation is laid. Once a motion is requested, the judge will first determine if sufficient foundation of the witness’s expertise has been established. If the judge feels that such foundation has been established, the judge will then ask opposing counsel if he/she has any objection to the admission of the expert. The court may then permit opposing counsel to voir dire the expert in accordance with Empire Rules of Procedure Rule 5.5.
Rule 401
Rule 401 - Definition of “Relevant Evidence”
Definition: Evidence is considered relevant if it has the potential to make a fact more or less likely and if that fact is important in determining the outcome of the case.
Example: A witness testifies that they saw the defendant leaving the crime scene shortly after the crime occurred.
Response: This testimony is relevant because it tends to make the fact of whether the defendant was present at the crime scene more probable, which is important in determining their involvement in the crime.
Rule 402
Rule 402 - General Admissibility of Relevance Evidence
Relevant evidence is admissible unless the United States Constitution, these rules, or other rules prescribed in Empirion provide otherwise.
Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.
Rule 406
Rule 406 -Habit; Routine Practice
Definition: Evidence of a person’s habit or an organization’s routine practice can be presented to show that on a specific occasion, the person or organization acted in line with that habit or routine practice.
Example: In a negligence case, a witness testifies that the defendant driver always stops at a particular intersection, even when the light is green, out of habit.
Response: The court may allow this testimony to demonstrate that on the occasion in question, the defendant likely stopped at the intersection despite the green light, based on their habitual behavior. This evidence can be admitted regardless of corroboration or the presence of an eyewitness.
Lack of Foundation
Rule 602 lack of foundation
Definitions: Witness testimony requires supporting evidence.
Example: Without sufficient evidence, a witness cannot testify.
Response: Witness testimony must meet personal knowledge standards, except for expert testimony under Rule 703.
Importance: Ensures credibility and reliability of witness testimony.
When should you object relevance
If this fact doesn’t go to bias, credibility, an element of the charge, the defense or claim it’s time to object.
When should you object relevance
If this fact doesn’t go to bias, credibility, an element of the charge, the defense or claim it’s time to object.
Relevance
401
Than existing mental emotional or physical condition
803)3
How you should respond to a relevance objection
Case: todays case is about ___
Element: to prove our case we need to show (an element of the charge, claim or defense)
Testimony: the witness just testified
Connection: the fact that (the witness said) makes (the element) more/less likely to
What does relevant evidence help prove
Evidence that tends to make the fact of consequence (the impact of the outcome of the case) more or less likely
What does CRAC stand for
Conclusion, Rule, Analysis/Application, and Conclusion
403
Balancing test judges may EXclude relevant evidence if there is a risk of improper basis, confusing of mixing leading the jury or unduly prolonging the trial
Balancing test for relevant evidence
403
Balancing test for relevant evidence
403
 substantially more prejudicial than it is probative
403
