TP Flashcards
In a civil lawsuit, PlantGro Inc. is suing FertileCo for patent infringement related to a new fertilizer formula. The following evidence has been presented in court:
A) An email from FertileCo’s CEO to the head of R&D, stating: “We need to replicate PlantGro’s formula ASAP.”
B) Testimony from a former FertileCo employee claiming he overheard discussions about copying PlantGro’s formula.
C) Chemical analysis showing FertileCo’s new fertilizer has a 98% similar composition to PlantGro’s patented formula.
D) Market data showing FertileCo’s sales increased significantly after introducing their new fertilizer.
E) A social media post by a FertileCo intern hinting at “borrowed innovations.”
Which piece of evidence is likely to be considered the strongest in supporting PlantGro’s claim of patent infringement?
A. Email
B. Testimony
C. Chem Analysis
D. Market Data
E. Social Media Post
C. Chem Analysis
During a federal trial for securities fraud, the following events occur:
1. The prosecution calls Witness A, a former employee of the defendant’s company. The prosecutor’s questioning is disorganized, jumping between topics and time periods, making the testimony difficult to follow.
2. Defense counsel’s cross-examination of Witness B becomes repetitive, asking the same questions multiple times in slightly different ways.
3. The prosecution calls Witness C, an expert in forensic accounting. The prosecutor hands Witness Ca
100-page financial report and asks them to read it aloud in its entirety.
4. During the defense’s case, their expert witness starts to give a lengthy explanation of basic accounting principles that are not in dispute and are unrelated to the specific charges.
5. A key prosecution witness appears visibly uncomfortable and anxious during cross-examination. The defense attorney’s tone becomes increasingly aggressive and confrontational.
Based on Federal Rule of Evidence 611(a), what action should the judge take?
A. The judge should not intervene in any of these situations, as controlling the presentation of evidence is solely the responsibility of the
attorneys.
B. The judge should only intervene in situation 5 to protect the witness, but allow the other examinations to proceed as the attorneys see fit.
C. The judge should exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of examining witnesses and presenting evidence to ensure efficiency and protect witnesses, but should not be concerned with the effectiveness of the procedures for determining the truth.
D. The judge should exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of examining witnesses and presenting evidence to make the procedures effective for determining the truth, avoid wasting time, and protect witnesses from harassment.
D. Judges can intervene as necessary in these things to help move things along.
Sarah is on trial for burglary. The prosecution presents evidence that a fingerprint matching Sarah’s was found on a broken window at the crime scene. The judge instructs the jury that if they find the fingerprint evidence credible, they may presume Sarah was present at the scene, but this presumption can be rebutted by gther evidence. Sarah testifies that she was at the location a week before the rime occurred to deliver a package, which is when she touched the window. She provides a receipt from the delivery service corroborating her story. Which of the following best describes the operation of the presumption in this case?
A. The fingerprint evidence conclusively proves
Sarah’s guilt, and her testimony is irrelevant.
The prosecution must now prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Sarah was not making a delivery.
C.
The judge’s instruction creates a mandatory presumption that Sarah was at the scene, which her testimony fails to overcome.
D. The fingerprint creates a rebuttable presumption of Sarah’s presence, and her testimony provides evidence to potentially overcome this presumption.
Answer: D
can testify because that is not the basis for competency.
oo. ruer the law there is no age under whic
John, who has been diagnosed with schizophrenia, witnessed a car accident in Florida. During a civil trial in federal court related to the accident, John is called to testify. According to Florida law, a person of unsound mind is competent to testify if they understand the duty to tell the truth and have personal knowledge of the matters they will testify about. Under FRE 601, is John competent to testify?
A. No, because John has a mental illness and therefore is not competent.
B. Yes, if John understands the duty to tell the truth and has personal knowledge of the car accident.
C. No, because federal common law, not state law, governs witness competency in civil cases.
D. Yes, because the Federal Rules of Evidence always consider mentally ill individuals competent.
B
19% 个
Sarah, a 7-year-old girl, is the only witness to a car accident that occurred in front of her house. The defense attorney has challenged Sarah’s competency to testify.
During the competency hearing, the judge learns the following: Sarah can accurately describe what she saw during the accident; When asked about the difference between truth and lies, Sarah states, “Telling the truth is good, and lying is bad”; Sarah promises to tell the truth but cannot explain what an oath means;
Sarah can answer questions about her daily routine and recent events at school with consistent detail. Based on this information, how is the judge most likely to rule on Sarah’s competency to testify?
A. Sarah is competent to testify because she is over 6 years old.
B. Sarah is not competent to testify because she cannot explain what an oath means.
C. Sarah is competent to testify, but her testimony must be corroborated by an adult witness.
D. Sarah is likely competent to testify, but the judge may impose some conditions.
D.
Sarah is likely competent to testify, but the judge may impose some conditions.
The judge is most likely to rule that Sarah is competent to testify but may impose some conditions. The rationale for this answer is:
1. There is no fixed age requirement for witness competency. Each child is evaluated individually.
2. Sarah demonstrates an ability to perceive and recall events accurately, which is crucial for competency.
3. She shows a basic understanding of the importance of truthfulness, even if she can’t explain the concept of an oath.
4. Her ability to consistently describe her daily routine suggests she can communicate effectively.
5. The inability to explain an oath doesn’t automatically disqualify her, as many jurisdictions allow alternatives for young children, such as a simple promise to tell the truth.
The judge might impose conditions such as using simpler language, allowing frequent breaks, or having a support person present during testimony. The key is that Sarah shows the fundamental capacities necessary for providing reliable testimony, even if some accommodations may be needed.
120个
个
Lisa is on trial for the murder of her husband, John. The prosecution alleges that during an argument, Lisa intentionally shot John. Lisa claims the shooting was accidental. Initially, Lisa could not remember the exact details of the incident. Her defense attorney suggested she undergo hypnosis to help recover her memories. After the hypnosis sessions, Lisa recalled that the gun had discharged accidentally when John grabbed her arm during their argument. The state has a per se rule excluding all hypnotically refreshed testimony. The trial judge, following this rule, has decided to limit Lisa’s testimony to only her statements made before undergoing hypnosis. Based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Rock v. Arkansas, 483 U.S. 44 (1987), how should the appeals court rule on the admissibility of Lisa’s hypnotically refreshed testimony?
A.
B.
C.
D.
The court should uphold the exclusion of Lisa’s hypnotically refreshed testimony because states have the right to establish their own rules regarding the admissibility of evidence.
The court should allow Lisa’s hypnotically refreshed testimony without any restrictions because the Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant’s right to present a complete defense.
The court should rule that the blanket exclusion of Lisa’s hypnotically refreshed testimony is unconstitutional, but the trial court may evaluate the testimony’s reliability before admitting it.
The court should exclude Lisa’s hypnotically refreshed testimony but allow expert witnesses to testify about the general reliability of hypnosis-induced memories.
Answer C
0%8
A convenience store was robbed at gunpoint. The only eyewitness, Tom, saw the robber’s face briefly as he fled the scene. Initially, Tom could only provide a vague description to the police.
Frustrated with the lack of leads, Detective Johnson suggested that Tom undergo hypnosis to enhance his memory of the event. After a hypnosis session conducted by a certified forensic hypnotist, Tom provided a much more detailed description of the robber, including specific facial features and clothing. Based on this new information, the police arrested Mark Stevens, who matched the detailed description. At trial, the prosecution wants to introduce Tom’s post-hypnosis testimony identifying Mark as the robber. Mark’s defense attorney has objected to the admission of this testimony. How should the court rule on the admissibility of Tom’s post-hypnosis eyewitness testimony?
A. The court should admit Tom’s testimony without restriction, as hypnosis is a scientifically valid method for memory enhancement.
B. The court should exclude Tom’s post-hypnosis testimony entirely, as eyewitness testimony is inherently unreliable and hypnosis exacerbates this unreliability.
C. The court should admit Tom’s testimony but require a cautionary instruction to the jury about the potential unreliability of hypnotically refreshed memories.
D. The court should only admit Tom’s pre-hypnosis statements and exclude any new or changed information that emerged after hypnosis.
D.
While Rock v. Arkansas ruled against per se exclusion of hypnotically refreshed testimony for defendants, courts have been more cautious with hypnotically enhanced eyewitness testimony.
Many jurisdictions have adopted the safeguards or guidelines for hypnotically refreshed testimony, which include recording pre-hypnosis memories, using certified hypnotists, and recording the hypnosis session.
