Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/19

Click to flip

19 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Lay Witness Testimony
It is innapropriate for a lay witness to incorporate in his testimony his own inferences in the form of an "opinion" or "conclusion" UNLESS the opinion is rationally based on the witness' perception and helpful to the factfinder (jury)
Supremacy Clause (Crawford)
Under Crawford, out of court statements by witnesses that are testimonial are inadmissable under the Confrontation Clause unless 1) the witness is unavailable to testify, and 2) the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the witness, regardless of whether the witness' statement is reliable
Exclusion of Witnesses
At the request of a party the court shall order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses
Expert Witness Testimony on Defendant's Mental State
FRE disallows an expert witness in a criminal case to give an opinion as to defendant's mental state if it constitutes an element of the crime charged
Admission of Prior Convictions
Admission of prior convictions involving dishonesty and false statements is not within the discretion of the court - such convictions are peculiarly probative of credibility and are always to be admitted
Leading questions
Leading questions should not be used on direct examination of a witness excvept as may be necessary to develop questions.
Threats by a defendant against testifying witness
Threats by a defendant agaisnt testifying witnesses either before or during trial are relevant evidence to show consciousness of guilt and are admissable as an admission
Privilege for marital communications
Extends to any confidential statement made between spouses during the existance of a legal marriage - most jurisdictions hold that the privilege survives the termination of the marriage either bydeath or divorce
Expert opinion
The facts or data in the particular case upon which an expert bases an opinion or inference may be those percieved by or made known to the expert at or before the hearing - if basing opinion on information reasonably relied on by other experts in the field the experts testimony is admissable without regard to personal knowledge.
Attorney-client privilege
The attorney client privilege prevents testimonial disclosure, discovery, or seizure by subpoena of confidential communications b/t attorney & client absent client waiver
The privilege attaches when a client first consults a lawyer about representing him - there preliminary discussions remain privileged evein if the attorny is not retained and the privilege persists even after the attorney-client relationship ends
The privilege is lost however, when the client carelessly discloses communications, as when he telephones his lawyer within the hearing of policement or other bystanders
"Catch All" or Residual Exception to the Hearsay Rule
In order to qualify for admission, a hearsay statement not falling w/in one of the recognized exceptions must satisfy the following conditioms:
1) it must have "equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness
2) it must be offered as evidence of a material fact
3)the court must determine that the statement "is more probative on the point for whichit is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procur through reasonable efforts
"Equivalent Circumstantial Guarantees of trustworthiness"
Court will consider:
1) whether the statement was under oath
2) the duration of the time lapse b/t the event and the statement
3)motivation to speak truthfully
4)whether the declarant had first hand knowledge.
Present Sense Exception to the Hearsay Rule
Covers statements describing/explaining an event made while the declarant was percieveing the event or immediately there after
Former Testimony Exception to the Hearsay Rule
Applies to testimony given under oath at a trial,. hearing or in a deposition where there has been an opportunity for cross examination
Hearsay
Hearsay rule applies when the proponent offers the declarants assertion for a purpose that requires the trier of fact to accept as true the facts it embodies - if the particular statemnt is not being offered for its truth - then the hearsay rule is inapplicable
NON-HEARSAY
1) Verbal Acts (proof of oral utterances by a parties in a contractaction constituting the offer/acceptance
2) Utterances and writings offered to show the effect on the reader (patron sues grocery store for injuries sustained in slip and fall on broken ketchup bottle - the store calls clerk who will testify that he heard the manager call out to parton "Don't step on bottle of ketchup)
3) Statements disclosing declarants state of mind (Witness testifies that several months b/f testator died,he said "my nephew is an spendthrift who is to lazy to hold a job)
Is profered item the same one involved in the controversy?
The resolutin is found in establishing a chain of custody, through the testimony of successive custodians - generally the chain is adequately forged if the evidence accounting for the item is sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to conclude that the offered evidence is the original -
NON-HEARSAY
1) Verbal Acts (proof of oral utterances by a parties in a contractaction constituting the offer/acceptance
2) Utterances and writings offered to show the effect on the reader (patron sues grocery store for injuries sustained in slip and fall on broken ketchup bottle - the store calls clerk who will testify that he heard the manager call out to parton "Don't step on bottle of ketchup)
3) Statements disclosing declarants state of mind (Witness testifies that several months b/f testator died,he said "my nephew is an spendthrift who is to lazy to hold a job)
Is profered item the same one involved in the controversy?
The resolutin is found in establishing a chain of custody, through the testimony of successive custodians - generally the chain is adequately forged if the evidence accounting for the item is sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to conclude that the offered evidence is the original -