Relevance Flashcards
401
Evidence is relevant if:
1) it has ANY tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence and
2) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.
two definitions for 401
1) evidence must be probative, it must prove or disprove a fact by making it “more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.”
- it must have some TENDENCY to make a fact or less probable.
- it will be probative if it contributes just one brick to the wall of proof built by a party
2) evidence is MATERIAL if it bears on a fact “of consequence in determining the action.
- whether an issue is material, look to substantive law
104 (b)Conditional Relevance
- When the relevancy of evidence depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the Court shall admit it upon, or subject to, the introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding of the fulfillment of the condition.
- The judge must determine only that a reasonable jury could make the requisite factual determination based on the evidence before it.
- Must be sufficient evidence to support a jury finding of the conditional fact by a preponderance of the evidence.
- The relevancy of an item of evidence is always dependent on the other information we have.
FRE 402
Relevant evidence is admissible unless barred by:
1) The Constitution
2) A Statute
3) The FRE
4) Other SCOTUS Rules
Irrelevant evidence is inadmissible
FRE 403 “The Exclusion”
The Court may exclude relevant evidence
“if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of:”
- unfair prejudice,
- confusing the issues,
- misleading the jury,
- undue delay,
- wasting time, or
- needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
A fact is of consequence if it relates to:
- an element of a criminal charge, civil claim, or defense or,
- theory of the prosecution or defense.
Do courts allow a lot of evidence in or is it hard?
courts do not really give a fuck. If it has any tendency to prove or disprove something that shit is coming in the mother fucking court room.
FRE 104(b) Conditional Relevance
Evidence is relevant conditioned upon the existence of certain other facts
.When relevance depends on whether a fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist.
FRE 104(b) requires sufficient evidence such that a jury could find by a preponderance of the evidence that the fact exists.
The court may admit the proposed evidence on the condition that the proof be introduced later.
401/ 403 sliding scale
401 ANALYSIS
-What is the probative value of the evidence?
-Does the evidence advance the resolution of contested issues?
403 ANALYSIS
- If the evidence does not address contested issues or if its PV is low, then the unfair prejudice, even if less “substantial,” may still warrant exclusion.
- Note the availability of other means of evidence. ACN 403
The Four Flight Inferences
1) He ran.
2) He ran because he knew he broke the law.
3) He ran because, not only did he know he broke the law, he knew he broke this law.
4) He ran because he knew he broke this law – so his guilt for the crime may be reasonably inferred.
Jury Instruction: Evidence of Flight
The intentional flight of a defendant immediately after the commission of a crime or after he is accused of a crime is not sufficient evidence in itself to establish guilt but is a fact which, if proved, may be considered by the jury in determining guilt
FRE 404(a)(1) The Character-Propensity Rule
Evidence of a person’s character is NOT ADMISSIBLE to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait.
FRE 403> 401
FRE 404(a)(1) prohibits the admission of propensity evidence due to the risk of unfair prejudice, juror confusion, and waste of time.
As a matter of law, propensity evidence fails the 401/403 test.
FRE 404(b)(1) A Breakdown
Evidence of a CRIME, WRONG, or OTHER ACT is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.
This language effectively mirrors the “character trait” language in FRE 404(a)(1).
Evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act means any act not directly at issue in the case.
The other act need not be a crime, an arrest, or even “wrong.”
The other act need not happen prior to the crime in question.
FRE 404(b)(2) Crime Wrong or Other Act
Crime, Wrong, or other act evidence may be admissible to prove:
- Motive
- Opportunity
- Intent
- Preparation
- Plan
- Knowledge
- Identity
- Absence of mistake
- Lack of accident
FRE 404(b)(2) A Breakdown
The permitted purposes listed under 404(b)(2) are NOT EXCEPTIONS to 404(a)(1) or (b)(1). They are just examples of prior acts evidence that may be admissible to prove something other than propensity.
FRE 105: Limiting instructions
FRE 105 limiting instructions restrict the evidence to its proper scope.
The court must give a limiting instruction upon request.
Always consider the role of FRE 105 in a FRE 404(b)(2) analysis.
(Last resort)
FRE 404(b)(2) Knowledge
CWOA evidence may be offered to prove that the defendant – to the exclusion of others – had the necessary or specialized knowledge to carry out the earlier theft.
Unless the evidence puts the defendant in a small pool of culprits, its probative value will likely be substantially outweighed by a risk of unfair prejudice.
MUST BE SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE, GENERIC KNOWLEDGE IS USUALLY INSUFFICIENT BASIS FOR ADMISSIBILITY
FRE 404(b)(2) Identity
Evidence may be offered that the defendant committed similar crimes using the same or a distinctive modus operandi as that used by the perpetrator of the charged crime.
Such evidence goes to the identity of the defendant.
(closer the geography, time) better to be admissible.
-look for FACTUAL SIMILARITY between the two acts
FRE 404(b)(2) Intent
FRE 404(b)(2) intent may be an avenue for admission of a Crime, Wrong, or Other Act if no dispute exists about the act(s) of the accused but only that he or she lacked criminal intent.
Look for fact patterns in which the mental state – intent is disputed by the defendant.
Exceptions to 404(a)(1)
FRE 413, 414, and 415
“crime, wrong or other act evidence IS ADMISSIBLE in both civil and criminal cases on “any relevant matter, INCLUDING TO SHOW PROPENSITY”
413
In a criminal case where defendant accused of a SEXUAL ASSAULT
The court may admit evidence that the defendant committed any other sexual assault.
As to any matter to which it is relevant, including propensity.
414
permits evidence of prior CHILD MOLESTATION in like cases.
415
FRE 415 permits evidence of previous sexual assault or child molestation in civil cases as provided in FRE 413 and 414.
