Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact in the case more or less probable, and this fact is of consequence in determining the action
(Evidence is relevant if it makes anything in the case more or less likely to have happened)
Relevant evidence is admissible; irrelevant evidence is not
The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of unfair prejudice, misleading the jury, or being cumulative
(Even if it is relevant, very confusing, redundant or unnecessarily prejudicial evidence can be excluded)
Evidence of a person's character through conformity with a past character trait is not admissible
(You can't use evidence that somebody did something once to prove that they probably did it again)
Methods of proving character are: reputation or opinion, specific instances of conduct (only when a person's character is essential to charge, claim or defense)
Evidence of habit or routine practice may be used to prove that a witness acted in accordance to this habit (regardless of corroboration or an eye witness)
(You can use evidence that a witness did something every day to prove that they did it on a given day even if they weren't seen)
Every person is competent to be a witness unless otherwise stated in the rules of evidence
(anyone can be a witness)
A witness needs to have personal knowledge of what they testify to (does not apply to experts)
(they need to have seen/heard/felt etc... what happened personally to talk about it)
Any party may impeach (attack a witnesses credibility)
Evidence of a witnesses reputation for truthfulness/untruthfulness is admissible character evidence. Truthful evidence is only admissible to refute a claim of untruthfulness.
(You can talk about whether or not a witness lies, but you can only say they don't lie if the other side says they do)
A non-expert witness must testify to evidence that is rationally based on their perception, helpful to understanding their testimony, and not based in specialized knowledge
(A non-expert witness cannot testify to expert things)
An expert witness is qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, OR education. They may testify to facts based on their expertise (with some limitations)
(An expert witness can testify to expert things)
An expert may testify to anything they have been made aware of , and if other experts would rely on those facts and data, they need not be admissible for the expert to testify
(experts can testify based on evidence that would otherwise be inadmissible (hearsay for example) to come to a conclusion if other reasonable experts would use the same evidence to reach conclusions, as long as it is within their area of expertise)
Facts and data underlying an expert's opinion need not necessarily be disclosed before the expert states an opinion
(experts don't need to use as much foundation sometimes)
Hearsay is an out of court statement being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted
(it was said out of court and is being offered as true)
A statement by a party opponent is not hearsay
Hearsay is not admissible (unless it falls under one of the exceptions)
Hearsay exceptions
Present Sense Impression hearsay exception
(statement describing/explaining a situation event or condition while perceiving it)
Excited Utterance hearsay exception
(statement relating to a startling event while under the stress of excitement from the situation)
Then Existing Mental, Emotional or Physical Condition hearsay exception
(statement of the declarant's state of mind (motive, intent, plan), emotional, sensory or physical condition)
Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity hearsay exception
(a statement made by somebody with knowledge near the time of relevant information, kept by a business or organization, and making the record was regular practice. The sources must not indicate lack of trustworthiness)
Statements in Learned Treatises, Periodicals or Pamphlets hearsay excpetion
(a statement in a document that is relied upon by an expert in cross or direct, and a reliable authority)
Exceptions to hearsay when a declarant is unavailable
Hearsay within hearsay
(for example, person A testifying about something they heard person B say that person C said)
Show Comments