Evidence

Front 1

Relevant Evidence

Back 1

Evidence that has any tendency to make a material fact more or less probable then it would be without the evidence

Front 2

Warning signals that evidence may not be logically relevant

Back 2

If the evidence involves some other time, event, and/or person

Front 3

Discretionary or policy-based relevance

Back 3

Relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, who's leading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, needlessly presenting cumulative evidence

Front 4

Discretionary or policy-based relevance does not include

Back 4

Unfair surprise

Front 5

Relevant Evidence may be used to prove the similar occurrences in time, events, and persons to prove

Back 5

Causation, prior accidents or claims, if intent or State of mind are in issue, rebuttable evidence, comparable sales to establish value, habit evidence, business routine, industry or trade custom

Front 6

Liability insurance

Back 6

Not admissible to person acted negligently or wrongfully or to show ability to pay. Exceptions admissible when relevant to show ownership or control

Front 7

Subsequent remedial measures

Back 7

Inadmissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product, a defect in a product design or a need for a warning or instruction. Exceptions the court Amendment evidence for another purpose such as impeachment or if disputed ownership control or the feasibility of precautionary measures

Front 8

Settlements

Back 8

Not admissible to prove fault, liability or amount of damages. There must be a claim.

Front 9

Character evidence for preliminary questions

Back 9

1 purpose of offer of character evidence 2 method of proving character 3 type of case civil or Criminal 4 what trait of character is involved

Front 10

Character evidence in civil cases

Back 10

Not admissible when offered as circumstantial evidence to infer conduct at the time of the litigated event. Admissible when the character of a person is itself a material issue in the case.

Front 11

Character evidence in a criminal case

Back 11

Not admissible at the initiative of the prosecution for the sole purpose to show Criminal disposition to infer guilt unless and until the accused offers evidence of good character pertinent trait in the form of reputation and opinion to show or infer innocence

Front 12

Specific instances offered for non character purposes

Back 12

To prove motive, intent, identity, modus operandi, common plan or scheme,

Hint 12

MIMIC

Front 13

Admissibility of a writing

Back 13

Generally a writing is inadmissible until it has been authenticated. A foundation must be laid showing that the writing is what purports to be, i.e. that it's genuine. Writings are not self authenticating. A testimonial Foundation is required.

Front 14

Direct evidence: Writing Authentication

Back 14

1. Admission 2. Eyewitness testimony 3. Handwriting proof a. Lay witness b. Expert witness c. Jury comparison. Lay witness cannot compare for litigation purposes

Front 15

Circumstantial evidence: writing authentification

Back 15

1. Ancient document rule 2. Solicited reply Doctrine 3. Quantum of proof 4. Self authenticating documents 5. Authentication of photographs

Front 16

Direct evidence writing Authentication

Back 16

1. Admission 2. Eyewitness testimony 3. Hand writing proofs a. Lay Witnesses B. Expert Witnesses C. Jerry comparison. Lay witness not permitted to compare signature for purposes of litigation

Front 17

Circumstantial evidence authentication writing

Back 17

1. Ancient document rule a. 20 or more years B. Regular on its face C. Found in a place of natural custody 2. Solicited reply Doctrine - proof that the disputed document came in response to Prior communication

Front 18

Quantum of proof

Back 18

Sufficient evidence to justify a jury finding of genuineness

Front 19

South authenticating documents

Back 19

General rule documents are not self-authenticating. Except certified copies of public or business records, official Publications, newspapers and periodicals, trade inscriptions or labels, acknowledge documents, signatures on certain commercial documents UCC

Front 20

Authentication of photographs

Back 20

Is this a fair and accurate representation of the[] as you remember it on the day of the incident

Front 21

Best evidence rule

Back 21

Requires that a party seeking to prove the content of a writing (includes films, photos, X-rays and recordings) must either produce the original document or account for the absence of the original

Front 22

3 ways to object to the best evidence rule

Back 22

1. Improper Authentication 2. Hearsay 3. Best evidence rule

Front 23

Duplicates

Back 23

A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless: a genuine question is raised about authenticity of the original or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original

Front 24

Refreshing recollection

Back 24

When a witness's memory fails anything can be used to jog the witness's memory

Front 25

Recorded recollection

Back 25

If the witness is unable to remember all or part of the details of a transaction about which she once had personal knowledge her own writing shown to be reliable may be admitted in place of her own testimony

Front 26

Foundation for recorded recollection requires and showing that

Back 26

1. At one time the witness had personal knowledge 2. The List was made by or witnessed or adopted by the witness 3. The writing was timely made when the incident was fresh 4. The writing is accurate 5. The witness must be unable to remember all are part of the transaction

Front 27

Ever recorded recollection is admitted into evidence

Back 27

The riding will be admitted by reading it into evidence only

Front 28

Lay opinion testimony

Back 28

Admissible 1 rationally based on the perception of the witness ie personal knowledge 2 helpful to the Trier of fact

Front 29

Expert opinion testimony

Back 29

1. The subject matter must be appropriate for expert testimony 2. Must be qualified as an expert 3. Should possess a reasonable certainty or probability regarding the opinion 4. Opinion must be supported by a proper factual basis

Front 30

Competent evidence

Back 30

Evidence that doesn't violate the exclusionary rule