Evidence

90 flashcards by MentisLibrary

Relevance, character, impeachment, privileges, and the hearsay rule with its long list of exceptions. Cards are tied to their Federal Rule of Evidence number so the framework sticks together instead of falling apart.

What is the test for relevance?

Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence

What is the general rule about relevant and irrelevant evidence?

Relevant evidence is admissible unless the Constitution, a statute, the Federal Rules, or other Supreme Court rules provide otherwise; irrelevant evidence is never admissible

When may a court exclude relevant evidence under Rule 403?

When 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

Is evidence of subsequent remedial measures admissible?

Not to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a product defect, or a need for a warning; it may come in for another purpose such as ownership, control, or feasibility if disputed, or for impeachment

Are settlement offers admissible?

No, neither the offer nor conduct or statements made during compromise negotiations may be used to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim, or to impeach by prior inconsistent statement

Are offers to pay medical expenses admissible?

No, an offer or payment of medical, hospital, or similar expenses resulting from an injury is inadmissible to prove liability

Are guilty pleas that were later withdrawn admissible?

No. Withdrawn guilty pleas, nolo contendere pleas, statements made in plea proceedings, and statements in plea discussions with a prosecutor are inadmissible against the defendant

Is evidence of liability insurance admissible?

Not to prove whether a person acted negligently or wrongfully; it may be admitted for another purpose such as proving agency, ownership, control, or witness bias

What is the general rule on character evidence in a civil case?

Evidence of a person's character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with it

When may a criminal defendant open the door to character evidence?

By offering evidence of the defendant's own pertinent trait, after which the prosecutor may rebut it

What happens when a defendant attacks the victim's character?

The prosecutor may offer evidence to rebut it and may also offer evidence of the same trait in the defendant

What methods may be used to prove character when it is admissible?

Reputation or opinion testimony on direct examination; specific instances of conduct may be inquired into on cross-examination, and are used on direct only when character is an essential element

What is the rule on other crimes, wrongs, or acts?

They are inadmissible to prove a person's character to show conduct in conformity, but may be admissible for another purpose such as motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident

What is the special rule for sexual assault and child molestation cases?

In a criminal or civil case involving sexual assault or child molestation, evidence of the defendant's other such offenses is admissible and may be considered on any relevant matter, including propensity

What does the rape shield rule bar?

Evidence offered to prove a victim's other sexual behavior or sexual predisposition

When is habit evidence admissible?

Evidence of a person's habit or an organization's routine practice is admissible to prove conduct on a particular occasion in conformity with it

What is the general rule of witness competency?

Every person is competent to be a witness unless the rules provide otherwise; in a civil case a state law competency rule applies where state law supplies the rule of decision

What is the personal knowledge requirement?

A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of it

What is the scope of cross-examination in federal court?

It should not go beyond the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting credibility, though the court may allow more

When are leading questions permitted?

On cross-examination, on direct when necessary to develop testimony, and when a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party

What is refreshing recollection?

Showing a witness anything to jog memory; the witness then testifies from present memory, and an adverse party is entitled to inspect the item, cross-examine on it, and introduce relevant portions

Who may impeach a witness?

Any party, including the party that called the witness

What are the main methods of impeachment?

Bias or interest, prior inconsistent statement, contradiction, character for untruthfulness by reputation or opinion, specific acts of untruthfulness, criminal convictions, and sensory or mental defect

How may a witness's character for truthfulness be attacked?

By reputation or opinion testimony about the witness's character for truthfulness, though truthful character evidence is admissible only after the witness's character has been attacked

When may specific instances of a witness's conduct be raised on cross?

When probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, on cross-examination only, and extrinsic evidence of the act is not admissible

Which criminal convictions are admissible to impeach a witness?

Crimes involving a dishonest act or false statement are automatically admissible; other felonies come in subject to a Rule 403 balance, or for a criminal defendant only if probative value outweighs prejudicial effect

What is the ten-year limit on impeachment by conviction?

If more than ten years have passed since conviction or release from confinement, whichever is later, the conviction is admissible only if its probative value substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect and notice is given

How is a witness impeached with a prior inconsistent statement?

By asking about it; extrinsic evidence is admissible only if the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny it and the opposing party may examine the witness, unless justice requires otherwise

When is a prior inconsistent statement admissible for its truth?

When it was given under penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, other proceeding, or deposition and the declarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination about it

What is the collateral matter rule?

A witness may not be impeached by extrinsic evidence on a matter collateral to the issues, meaning one relevant only to contradict the witness