Presentation of Evidence Flashcards
In a diversity action where the state law determines the claim or defense, does federal or state law govern the effect of presumptions?
In a diversity action, when state substantive law determines the existence of a claim or defense, state law also governs the effect of presumptions related to that claim or defense. For example, if state law determines the existence of the user’s strict product liability claim, state law governs the effect of the heeding presumption that is related to that claim. If defendant fails to offer evidence in rebuttal to the presumption, the court may give it preclusive effect. (not burden shifting) The trier of fact does not have a choice in such case as to whether to apply the presumption.
Rule of completeness
Under the rule of completeness, when a party introduces part of a writing or recorded statement, an adverse party may compel the introduction of an omitted portion of the writing or statement if, in fairness, it should be considered at the same time, such as when the omitted portion explains or clarifies the admitted portion. The rule of completeness, however, does not require admission of irrelevant portions of a statement.
Does the writing sought to be introduced need to be part of the same writing?
The rule of completeness does not require that the writing or recorded statement be a part of the writing or recorded statement introduced by the adverse party. The only requirement is that, in fairness, the two should be considered together.
Can a judge hear preliminary matters that concern the admission of privileged information?
The trial judge generally decides preliminary questions regarding the competency of evidence, including the admissibility of evidence, whether privilege exists, and whether a person is qualified to be a witness. Hearings on preliminary matters must be conducted outside the presence of the jury when the hearing involves the admissibility of confessions, when a defendant in a criminal case is a witness and so requests, or when justice requires it. For example, admissibility of a statement by a victim identifying the defendant as his assailant is clearly a matter that justice requires that the jury not be present. The court is not bound by the Federal Rules in deciding these questions, except with respect to privileges. Accordingly, even the judge cannot consider the privileged evidence
How does a judge determine whether a co-conspirators statement will be admitted?
The judge must first consider whether the confession of the co-conspirator qualifies as an admission of a party opponent, which is not hearsay. This is a preliminary question regarding the competency of the evidence. The judge must rule on the admissibility of the confession before a jury can determine the weight and credibility of the confession.
What is the effect of a presumption that has been overcome by evidence to the contrary?
A presumption is a conclusion that the trier of fact is required to draw upon a party’s proof of an underlying fact or set of facts (i.e., basic facts). A rebuttable presumption shifts the burden of production, but not the burden of persuasion, to the opposing party. However, a rebuttable presumption may be overcome by evidence to the contrary. If no contrary evidence is introduced, the judge must instruct the jury to accept the presumption. If contrary evidence is introduced then the presumption no longer has a preclusive effect. At this point, the jury may, but is not required to, draw the conclusion from the basic facts. Thus, the jury may determine the weight and credibility of all of the evidence.
