Rule 401
Defines relevant evidence. If the evidence does not prove that the following facts are more or less true, it is irrelevant
Rule 402
Evidence is or isn’t admissible depending on it’s relevance. If evidence does not effectively prove facts that the veredict is using to determine a conclusion to be more or less true, the evidence is irrelevant, and therefore, inadmissable.
Rule 403
If the evidence unfairly creates a bias, wastes time, and does not have an effect in coming to a conclusion, it can be excluded. Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion or waste of time. Prejudice creates a bias against a side that violates their legal rights.
Rule 404
Character Evidence; character evidence not admissible to prove conduct. Something that happened in the past can’t be used to prove a point now. Exceptions: motive, opportunity, knowledge, intent.
Rule 405
Methods of proving character
a) reputation can only be admitted if it goes to prove truthfulness or untruthfulness
b) charge/claim can be made if character or character trait is essential to the trial
Rule 406
Habit or routine practice
Habit or routine practice can be admitted to prove that on a certain occasion, the person or organization acted in accordance with that habit/routine.
Habit or routine practice may be proved by opinion or specific instances that happened enough to warrant calling it a routine
Rule 410
Indamissiblity of pleas
Rule 501
General rule, communcations inadmissable as evidence
These are:
-husband and wife
-attorney and client
-psychiatrist and patient
Rule 602
Lack of personal knowledge
A witness can only testify to what they personally know, what they: saw, taste, heard, smelled, touched.
Even if they firmly believe something, they can not speculate without solid evidence.
Rule 608
Evidence of character, conduct of witness
a) opinion and reputation evidence of character can be attacked or suppored by evidence in form of reputation or opinion
limits:
-Can only refer to truthfulness or untruthfulness of character
-Evidence to prove character’s truthfulness is only admissiable only after it has been attacked
Rule 610
Relgious beliefs or opinions
You can’t use witness’ beliefs as evidence to prove them to be more or less credible
Rule 612
Writing used to refresh memory
If a witness uses a written statement to refresh memory, the opposing side can see and question the witness on the statement
Rule 613
Prior statements of a witness
a) examining a witness on a prior statement: when questioning a witness on what they said before, the statement, written or not, doesn’t have to be provided until the opposing counsel asks for it
b) extrinsic evidence of prior inconsistent statement of witness: you can’t use evidence to call a witness out until the witness can explain and the attorney can question them on it, only after these two things happen you can pull out evidence to prove them wrong
Rule 701
Opinion testimony by lay witness
Lay person may give their perception based on factual observations
Their testimony is limited to:
-rational perception
-relevant information
Rule 702
Testimony by experts
Any information needing special knowledge to understand can use an expert witness, expert witness must have education, experience, training, etc.
Rule 704
Opinion on ultimate issue (expert witness)
a) A witness can talk about opinions on issues or fact
b) witness can not come to a conclusion on guilt
Rule 705
Disclosure of facts or data underlying expert opinion
Expert can testify by giving their opinion and reasoning without needing data until court or opposing counsel requests the data.
