Evidence

Question 1

logical relevance

Answer 1

To be admissible, evidence must first be relevant. A piece of evidence is logically relevant
if it has any tendency to make a fact of consequence in the case more or less likely to be
true than it would be without the evidence

Question 2

Legal Relevance

Answer 2

To be admissible, evidence must also be legally relevant. Evidence may be excluded if its
probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of undue prejudice to the jury. Evidence is only prejudicial if it is likely to lead the jury to draw improper
conclusions about he defendant’s guilt or innocence.

Question 3

Witness competence

Answer 3

For the witness testimony to be admissible, witness be competent to testify regarding the evidence.
A witness is competent if he has personal knowledge about the facts that he is testifying
to.

Question 4

Burden of Persuasion

Question 5

Shifting Burdens

Question 6

Presumptions

Question 7

Inferences

Question 8

Relevance

Question 9

Conditional Relevance

Question 10

Materiality

Question 11

Probativeness

Question 12

Direct Evidence

Question 13

Circumstantial evidence

Question 14

Authentication

Answer 14

To be admissible, documentary evidence must be authenticated as being what it purports
to be.

Question 15

Methods of Authentication

Question 16

Best Evidence Rule

Answer 16

Under the best evidence rule, if a witness’s sole knowledge of facts comes from a written
document, then the fact must be proved from the written document unless the absence of
the document is explained and excused

Question 17

Offers of Proof

Question 18

Hearsay

Answer 18

an out of court statement offerd to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

Question 19

Non Hearsay

Question 20

Business Records Exception

Answer 20

the records of a business may be admitted
into evidence if they were regularly prepared in the ordinary course of business by business
employees with a duty to the business to maintain accurate records. Business is defined
to not only include for-profit businesses but also nonprofits and government agencies

Question 21

Business Kept in the Regular

Answer 21

A writing made in the ordinary course of business,
At or near the time of the act, condition or event,
A custodian or other qualified witness testifies to the writing’s identity and mode of preparation (foundation), and
The sources of information and method and time of preparation indicate trustworthiness

Question 22

Government Records Exception

Answer 22

the records must have been
maintained by a government agency and must be: (1) a record of the activities of that
agency, (2) a report prepared in accordance with a duty imposed by law, or (3) a report of
an investigation duly authorized by law. Government records of the police investigation
regarding a crime are not admissible against the defendant in a criminal trial, but other
government records are admissible.

Question 23

Multiple Hearsay

Question 24

Unavailability of the Declarant

Question 25

Hearsay Exceptions-Declarant Available Immaterial

Question 26

Hearsay Exception- Declarant MUST be available

Question 27

Impeachment

Question 28

Learned Treatise

Answer 28

Statements from a learned treatise are admissible only if: They are called to the attention of an expert witness on cross-examination or relied upon by the expert on direct, AND The treatise is established as a reliable authority by: Expert testimony, Judicial notice, or Admission of the expert 🚨 Critical limitation: Learned treatises may be read into evidence, but may not be received as exhibits.

Question 29

Lay Witness Testimony

Answer 29

Black-Letter Rule (FRE 701) A lay witness may give opinion testimony if it is: Rationally based on the witness’s perception, Helpful to understanding the witness’s testimony or a fact in issue, and Not based on scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge (i.e., not expert testimony). Courts routinely allow lay witnesses to identify: Drugs Alcohol intoxication Handwriting Speed Smell (e.g., marijuana) -> So long as the witness has sufficient familiarity or experience, the testimony is admissible.

Question 30

statement against penal interest

Answer 30

Rule (FRE 804(b)(3)): A statement is admissible if: The declarant is unavailable, and The statement was so contrary to the declarant’s penal interest that a reasonable person would not have made it unless it were true, and (In criminal cases) the statement is supported by corroborating circumstances that indicate trustworthiness.

Question 31

Crawford Rule

Answer 31

In a criminal case, the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause bars the admission of testimonial hearsay against a defendant unless the declarant is unavailable and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant.

Question 32

Testimonial Statements

Answer 32

A statement is testimonial if it was made: To law enforcement or government agents, AND With the primary purpose of establishing or proving past events for later prosecution Classic Testimonial Examples Police interrogations Affidavits Depositions Prior testimony at hearings or trials Statements made during formal questioning Classic Non-Testimonial Examples Casual remarks to friends or family Statements to co-conspirators Statements to private individuals Statements made for medical treatment Excited utterances to bystanders

Question 33

Marital Communications Privilege (Federal Common Law)

Answer 33

Confidential communications made between spouses during a valid marriage are privileged, and either spouse may assert the privilege to prevent disclosure, even if the other spouse is willing to testify. Key features: Applies only to communications, not acts Communication must be: Made during a valid marriage Intended to be confidential Survives divorce Belongs to both spouses

Question 34

Adverse Spousal Testimonial Privilege (Federal Criminal Cases)

Answer 34

In federal criminal cases, the testifying spouse alone holds the privilege to refuse to testify adversely against the other spouse. Key features: Applies only in criminal cases Covers all testimony, not just communications Belongs only to the witness spouse Ends upon divorce

Question 35

Bias, Interest, or Motive to Testify

Answer 35

A witness may be cross-examined on any matter that tends to show bias, interest, or motive to testify, including political, ideological, financial, or personal beliefs that could affect credibility. This is a non-character form of impeachment and is always relevant.

Question 36

Religious Beliefs and Credibility (FRE 610)

Answer 36

Evidence of a witness’s religious beliefs or opinions is not admissible to attack or support the witness’s character for truthfulness. 🚨 Critical limitation: FRE 610 does NOT bar evidence of religious beliefs when offered to show bias or motive, rather than character for truthfulness.

Question 37

Character Evidence — General Rule (FRE 404(a))

Answer 37

Evidence of a person’s character or character trait, or prior acts is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in conformity with that character or trait. However, character evidence may still be admitted if it is offered for some other purpose, such as to show motive, intent, modus operandi, or common plan or scheme. This applies in civil cases and criminal cases alike.

Question 38

Other Acts Evidence (FRE 404(b))

Answer 38

Evidence of prior acts is inadmissible when offered solely to show propensity, i.e., that because a person acted a certain way before, they likely acted the same way again. Prior acts may be admitted only for non-propensity purposes, such as: Motive Intent Absence of mistake Identity Knowledge

Question 39

Habit Evidence (FRE 406)

Answer 39

Evidence of a person’s habit or routine practice may be admitted to prove that the person acted in accordance with the habit on a particular occasion. Critical limitation: Habit requires regular, semi-automatic, invariable conduct in response to a specific situation. Occasional or situational behavior ≠ habit. Habit evidence is admissible only when it reflects regular, invariable conduct in response to a specific situation, not occasional or volitional acts.

Question 40

Limiting Instructions (FRE 105)

Answer 40

When evidence is admissible for one purpose but not for another, the court must restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly, upon request.

Question 41

Statements offered to show notice

Answer 41

Out-of-court statements offered to prove notice or knowledge, rather than the truth of the matter asserted, are not hearsa

Question 42

Statements for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment (FRE 803(4))

Answer 42

Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment describing medical history, symptoms, pain, or the general cause of injury are admissible if reasonably pertinent to diagnosis or treatment. 🚨 Critical limitation: Statements assigning fault or identifying the tortfeasor are not admissible under this exception, unless identity is medically relevant (e.g., child abuse, domestic violence). Also important: The declarant must be the patient or someone speaking on the patient’s behalf for medical purposes The statement must be reasonably relied upon for treatment

Question 43

Party Opponent Admissions

Answer 43

The statements will be admissible for their truth because the hearsay exemption for admissions by a party opponent applies. Under this hearsay exemption, the statements of an adverse party in a proceeding are not considered hearsay, regardless of when they were made.

Question 44

Official Document

Answer 44

Official certified documents from public agencies charged with complying the information contained in the document are exempt from the hearsay rule.