Relevance

Question 1

Rule 402

Answer 1

Evidence is only admissible if it’s relevant.

Question 2

When is evidence admissible? What rule

Answer 2

(Rule 401) When it is:

1: Probative (401(a))
a. )What is the fact?
b. ) Does it have any tendency to show that the fact is more or less probable

2: Material (401(b)) - Is it of consequence to an issue in the case (look to the statute or substantive law)

Question 3

When might knowledge be irrelevant?

Answer 3

when knowledge is not an element of the crime.

Question 4

US v. James

Answer 4

James charged w/ murder when she gave gun to her daughter and daughter shot victim. James claims self defense because victim bragged about stabbing a man. Court allowed police report corroborating stories Ogden told James even though issue was whether James reasonably feared victim.

Question 5

Rule 104

Answer 5

Conditional Relevance - inadmissible only when no reasonable jury could make the finding (based on the preponderance of the evidence.) (cox)

Question 6

Relevance Data Points

Answer 6

Abel - evidence about being in a gang where members would lie for each other is admissible to show ability to lie.

Scheffer - willingness to take polygraph “barely admissible” because it shows that he has a consciousness of innocence.

Egelhoff - evidence of intoxication not admissible because intoxication is not a valid defense in Montana

Berry - violin case pointed as gun. Evidence that there was cash in the case.

Question 7

Cox v. State

Answer 7

Def. shot victim. Prosecution claims it was retaliation b/c victim testified against def.’s friend at a bond hearing. State must prove that def. knew about bond hearing (conditional relevance). Court held this satisfied standard b/c Def. was at friends house the day after the bond hearing.

Question 8

Data points for conditional relevance

Answer 8

Cox v. State - EIQ - knowledge of friends bond hearing. Admitted b/c def. was at the friend’s house after the bond hearing.

Problem 1.7 - biological father case.