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

1/9

Click to flip

9 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Leading questions
No leading questions on direct, except as may be necessary to develop the witnesses testimony - Leading questions permitted on cross b/c adverse party considered hostile
Leading questions of defendant by defense attorney
On cross defendant if defendant is being questioned by his own attorney and there is dandger that defendant would appear to be biased in favor of the cross examiner - there is no right for the party to be further examined immediately by his own lawyer, but the judge has discretion to permit it or to acquire that his examination be deferred until the witness-party's own case is put on.
Judicial Notice
A court must take judicial notice of an adjudicative fact if
1) requested by a party and
2) the court is supplied with "necessary information"
Judicial notice is a proper subject for those facts that are "not subject to reasonable inquiry" and are either
1) "generally known" w/ in the trial court's jurisdiction or
2) "capable of accurate and ready determination" by reliable sources
** In civil cases, the jury MUST accept any judicially noticed fact as CONCLUSIVE
** In Criminal cases, the court "SHALL instruct the jury that it may, but is not required to, accept as conclusive any fact judicially noticed"
Judges power over the trial process
Within the limits of sound discretion judges can control the mode and order of presentation at trial, ask questions of the witnesses called by the parties, call witnesses themselves, exclude imflammatory or prejudicial evidence and sum up the evidence
**The judge must avoid extreme exercise of the power to comment on the weight of the evidence
Judge interjecting personal opinions
A judge may not cross the line from abriter to advocate by basing a decision on personal beliefs.
**private biases are impermissable considerations under he equal protection doctrine
Evidence of sudden financial improvement
When a defendant is charged w/ robbery/bribery, evidence of sudden acquisition of improvement in the financial condition of the accused is relevant circumstantial evidence of guilt of the accused even though the source of the money had not been traced by the prosecution
**not excluded as unfairly prejudicial
Common Knowlege Rule
Where the matter is w/in the common knowledge of laymen, as where the surgeon saws off the wrong leg, or there is injury to a part of the body not w/ in the field of the operation, it is often held that the jury may infer negligence w/o the aid of experts
Prior consistent statements
A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross concerning the statement, and the statement is consistent w/ his testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against him of recent fabrication or improper influence/motive
**admissable both to rehabilitate and as substantive evidence, particularly to show that a witness whose testimony has allegedly been influenced told the SAME story b/f the influence was brought to bear
Extrinsic evidence of prior inconsitent statements
Not admissable unless the witness is afforded an opportunity to explain/deny the same and the opposite party is afforded an opportunity to interrogate the witness thereon, or the interests of justice otherwise require
** a priorr unsworn inconsistent statement may be admitted to impeach despite the lack of an opportunity to explain/deny the prior statement where exclusion would not serve the interest of justice
Ex: where counsel is surprised and damaged by the witnesses direct testimony and the witness becomes unavailable b/f the opportunity arises for cross