Evidence Mbe

Front 1

Relevance

Back 1

Evidnec is relevant if it has any tendency to make a material facte more probable or less probable

Front 2

Admissibility of Liability Insurance

Back 2

Evidence that a person has liability insurance is inadmissible for the purpose of proving fault or absence of fault.

Maybe admissible to prove ownership or impeach witness

Front 3

Admissibility of Subsequent remedial measures

Back 3

Repairs, design changes, or policy changes taken after an accident are indamissible for proving: negligence, culpable conduct, a product defect, or a need for a warning.

Maybe used to prove ownership, control, feasiability of safe condition

Front 4

Admissibility of Settlements

Back 4

If there is a disputed claim, the evidence of settlements, offers to settle, or statements made in settlement discussions are inadmissible if offered to prove liability.

Front 5

Offer to pay hospital and medical expenses

Back 5

Evidence that party has paid or offered to pay an accidnet victim's hospital or medical expense is inadmissible to prove liability.

Front 6

Admissibility of Pleas and plea discussion

Back 6

An offer to plea guilty or a withdrawn guilty peas are inadmissible against a defendant in a pending criminal litigation or in a subsequent case

Front 7

Character evidence on a criminal case

Back 7

Evidence if the defendant's character is generally not admissible to prove propensity

Front 8

Defendant's introduction of character evidence
criminal case)

Back 8

The defendant may introduce evidence of his own good character of relevant trait.

If the defendant does so, the prosecution may rebut with evidence of defendant's bad character for the same trait

Front 9

Form of character evidence

Back 9

The proper method of character evidence is reputation or opinion

CANNOT use a specific acts

Front 10

Defendant's Character Offered by the Prosecution

Back 10

If the defendant has "opened door" by calling character witnesses, the prosecution may rebut by:
Calling it own witnesses to testify to teh defendant's relevant bad character (reputaton or opinion)
By cross examining defendants character witnesses by questioning their knowledge specific act "did you know" "have you heard"

Front 11

Victim's Character in Self defense case

Back 11

A criminal defendant may offer evidence of the vitcims violent character to prove that the victim was the first agressor. (reputation or opinion)
Proscution may rebut with the victims good character trait or with the defendant's bad character trait.

Front 12

Defendants Rules for Defendants Knowledge of the victims character for violence

Back 12

The defendant may offer evidence of his own knowledge of the victim's bad character for violence for the purpose of showing he reasonbaly believed in a need to use self defense

Front 13

Victim's character in a sexual misconduct trial

Back 13

In a case involving alleged sexual misconduct (civil or criminal), the defendant ordinarily may not introduce evidece of the victim's promiscuity or the victim's prior sexual conduct.

Front 14

When a defendant can introduce evidence of a victim's sexual character

Back 14

Evidence of the victim's other sexual activity witht eh defendant, but only if the defense is consent,
To prove that someone other than the defendant was the souce of the injury
Evidence required to be admitted by the defendant's due process rights

Front 15

Character evidence in civil case

Back 15

Character evidence is generally inadmissible to propensity in a civil case UNLESS
it is essential element of a claimor defense (negligent hiring, defamation: libel and slander)

Front 16

M-I-M-I-C rule

Back 16

If the defendants other crimes or bad acts may be admissible if offered to show something specific about the charge crime
Motitve, Intent, Mistake of accident, Identity (MO), Common scheme or plan

Front 17

Similar Occurences

Back 17

To be relevant, evidence must relate to some time, event, or person involves in the present litigatoin.

Front 18

Similar Accidents causes by same event or condition

Back 18

Other similar accidnets are generally not admissible, unles other accidents involving the same instrumentality or condition, and occurrin under substantially similar circumstances may be admitted for 3 potential purposes
Existence of dangerous condition, causation, prior notice to the defendant

Front 19

Habit Evidence

Back 19

habit of person (or routine of a business) is admissible to infer how the person (or business) acted on the occasion at issue in the litigation.

Front 20

Def. of Habit

Back 20

A repetitive response to a particular set of circumstances. (frequency and particularity)

Front 21

Business Routine

Back 21

Regular practice of an organization is admissible to prove conduct on a particular occasion

Front 22

Authenticating preson's handwriting

Back 22

Lay opinion, expert opinion and comparison, and jury comparision.

Front 23

Ancient Document Rule

Back 23

1) at least 20 years old (NY 30 years
2)Facially free of suspicion AND
3) Found where it would be expected

Front 24

Solicited Reply Doctrine

Back 24

Documents can be authenticated by evidence that it was received in repsonse to a prior communication to teh alleged author

Front 25

Self Authenicating Documents

Back 25

Officail government publications, certified copies of public or private docs, newspapers, periodicals, trade inscriptions, ackowledged documents, commercial paper, and certified business records.

Front 26

Best evidence Rule

Back 26

A party seeks to prove the contents of a writing, the party must either: produce the writing, OR provide an acceptable excuse for its absence

Front 27

Dead Man's Statute

Back 27

In a civil action an interested party may not testify against a dead party's representative about communications or transaction with the dead party.

Front 28

Refreshing Recollection

Back 28

But, if a witness forgets somethinf he onse knew, he may be shown a writing to his memory.

Front 29

Past Recollent recorded

Back 29

A writing may be read to the jury as a past recollection recorded is: the witness once had personal knowledge; the witness now forgets, showing the writing to witness fails to jog the witness's memory; the writing was made by the witness, the writing was made when the event was freshin the witnes's memory, and the witness can attest that the writing was accurate.

Front 30

Lay Witness

Back 30

A lay witness is can testify for to sobriety, emotions, speed, handwriting, and smell

Front 31

Expert Witness

Back 31

A witness may testify to an opinion as an expert only if:
the witness is qualified (by education or experience);
the testimony is about a subject matter where scientific or specialized knowledge will be helpful to the jury
The oopinion has a proper basis
The opinion is reliable

Front 32

Proper basis for opinion

Back 32

The opinion must be based on a reasonable degree of probability or reasonable certainty; and the opinion must be based on the experts personal knowledge, evidnece that is already in teh trial record, or facts that are reasonably relied upon by experts in the feild.

Front 33

Cross Examination

Back 33

It is a right to cross examine a witness. If the witness cannot be crossed then the testimony is struck.

Front 34

Impeachment Methods

Back 34

Prior inconsistent statements, bias interest (motive), sensory deficiencies, reputation opinion, criminal conviction, bad acts, and contradictions

Front 35

Witness's bad characer for truthfulness

Back 35

Veracity: the character trait of being truthful. A witness's bad character for veracity is a frequent subject of impeachment and governed by very specific rules.

Front 36

Federal Rule on Conviction to Impeach

Back 36

A conviction (or release from preison) must be within 10 years of the trial, crimes of dishonesty or false statement are admissible, or felony if its probative value does not outweigh the risk of unfair prejudice.

Front 37

Reliabilty of Expert Testimony

Back 37

To be admissible expret opinion must be be sufficiently reliable:
The espert has used relied methods
The expert has relialy applied those methods to the particular facts of the case

Front 38

Ultimate Issue

Back 38

Opinion tetimony generally permissible even if it addresses an ultimate issue in the case.
EXCEPION: In a driminal case, an expert witness may not testify that the defendant did or did not have th required mens rea