1. Relevance
1.1. Any tendancy to make a fact of consequence more or less probable
1.1.1. Materiality; Probativeness
1.2. Irrelevant --> Inadmissible
1.3. Relevant --> Admissible
1.3.1. UNLESS
1.3.1.1. Specific exclusionary rule
1.3.1.2. Rule 403: Substantially outweighed
1.4. Similar occurences
1.4.1. Evidence involves some other time, event, or person is irrelevant/inadmissible, but there is rules that permit admissibility.
1.4.1.1. P's accident history
1.4.1.1.1. Generally INADMISSIBLE
1.4.1.1.2. Admissible if cause of P's damages is in issue.
1.4.1.2. Similar accident caused by same event or condition
1.4.1.2.1. Generally INADMISSIBLE
1.4.1.2.2. Admissible for purposes 1) existence of dangerous condition 2) Causation 3) Prior notice to D
1.4.1.3. Intent in issue
1.4.1.3.1. Admissible
1.4.1.4. Habit
1.4.1.4.1. Admissible
1.4.1.4.2. Distinguish Character evidence ("careless driver"), CT is INADMISSIBLE
1.5. Public policy exclusions
1.5.1. Liability insurance
1.5.1.1. Inadmissible
1.5.1.2. Admissible for purpose: - proof of ownership; Impeachment of a witness
1.5.1.3. Liability insurance only, casualty insurance doesn't apply.
1.5.2. Subsequent remedial measure
1.5.2.1. Inadmissible for negligence, culpable conduct, product defect, need of warning
1.5.2.2. Admissible for other purpose
1.5.2.2.1. Proof of ownership/control
1.5.2.2.2. Feasibility of safer condition
1.5.3. Settlement in civil cases
1.5.3.1. Inadmissible
1.5.3.1.1. Prove liability
1.5.3.1.2. Impeach prior inconsistent statement
1.5.3.1.3. Only applies if disputed claim. (Validity, amount of damages)
1.5.3.2. Admissible to impeach a biased witness
1.5.4. Plea discussions in criminal cases
1.5.4.1. Inadmissible: 1) Offer to plead guilty 2) Withdrawn guilty plea 3) Plea of nolo contendere 4) Statement of fact
1.5.4.2. Admissible: Plea of guilty
1.5.5. Offer to pay medical or hospital expenses
1.5.5.1. Inadmissible to prove liability
1.5.6. Character Evidence
1.5.6.1. Criminal cases, D's character
1.5.6.1.1. Inadmissible to prove conduct in conformity during the prosecution's case-in-chief
1.5.6.1.2. D could use relevant character trait to prove conduct in conformity
1.5.6.2. Criminal cases, Victim's character
1.5.6.2.1. D introduce E of victim's violent character i.e. victim was the first aggressor
1.5.6.2.2. Open the door to rebuttal with 1) victim's good character 2) D's bad character
1.5.6.3. Civil cases
1.5.6.3.1. Character evidence is generally inadmissible
1.5.6.3.2. Admissible if character is directly in issue
1.5.6.4. D's other crimes or act
1.5.6.4.1. Inadmissible to show conduct conformity
1.5.6.4.2. Admissible to show specifically about the crime charged
1.5.6.5. Other sexual conduct
1.5.6.5.1. Admissible to show D's propensity for sex crimes with prior sexual misconduct
1.6. Writings
1.6.1. Authentication of writings
1.6.1.1. standard: Sufficient evidence, a reasonable juror would conclude the document is genuine
1.6.1.2. Method
1.6.1.2.1. Witness's personal knowledge
1.6.1.2.2. Lay opinion: On basis of familiarity with X's handwriting
1.6.1.2.3. Expert comparison opinion
1.6.1.2.4. Jury comparison
1.6.1.3. Ancient document rule: Inferred authenticity if 1) >=20y old; 2) Facially free of suspicion 3) Found in a place of natural custody
1.6.1.4. Self authenticating document
1.6.1.5. Authentication of photographs
1.6.1.5.1. Witness testifies the photo is a "fair and accurate representation"
1.6.2. Best evidence rule
1.6.2.1. Original must be produced in order to prove the contents of the writing.
1.6.2.1.1. Original: 1) The writing itself 2) counterpart or negative 3) Duplicate
1.6.2.1.2. Excuse
1.6.2.2. When BER applies
1.6.2.2.1. Legally operative document
1.6.2.2.2. Witness solely learned from reading about them in a writing
1.6.2.3. When BER don't apply
1.6.2.3.1. Witness has knowledge of a fact that is independent from a writing.
1.6.2.4. Satisfied
1.6.2.4.1. i.e.certified copy of a record of conviction
2. Impeachment
2.1. Bolstering own witness
2.1.1. General not allowed, until witness's credibility has been attacked
2.1.2. Exception: prior identification of a person
2.2. Impeaching own witness
2.2.1. Permitted
2.3. Impeachment methods
2.3.1. For methods, consider 1) Can impeaching fact be proven by extrinsic evidence 2) Must witness first be confronted
2.3.2. Prior inconsistent statement
2.3.2.1. Generally not admissible as substantive evidence (only to impeach)
2.3.2.1.1. if made under oath and as part of a formal hearing, proceeding, trial or deposition, may be ADMITTED to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the PIS
2.3.2.2. Confrontation: Time flexible
2.3.2.2.1. After proof by extrinsic evidence, Witness has opportunity at some point (not immediate) to explain or deny the prior inconsistent statement
2.3.3. Bias, Interest or Motive to Misrepresent
2.3.3.1. Confrontation: Court has discretion in whether W be confronted
2.3.3.2. Extrinsic evidence: Court has discretion to permit even if W admits the bias
2.3.4. Sensory deficiencies
2.3.4.1. Confrontation: Not required
2.3.4.2. EE: Allowed
2.3.5. Contradiction
2.3.5.1. EE: Not allowed for contradiction if the fact at issue is collateral. (No significant relevance to the case/w's credibility)
2.3.5.2. if w admits, then impeached by contradiction
2.3.5.3. if w doesn't admit, issue is whether EE may be introduced
2.3.6. Bad reputation or opinion about W's character for truthfulness
2.3.6.1. Confrontation: Not required
2.3.6.2. EE: Allowed
2.3.6.2.1. No specific instance of conduct, opinion of reputation only
2.3.7. Criminal Convictions
2.3.7.1. Crime involving dishonesty or false statement
2.3.7.1.1. Court has NO DISCRETION
2.3.7.1.2. Crime involves bultering, speaking or writing of false words
2.3.7.2. Crime DOESN'T involve dishonesty or false statement
2.3.7.2.1. Must be a felony
2.3.7.2.2. Court has discretion to exclude
2.3.7.3. Must within 10 years
2.3.7.4. Method of proof
2.3.7.4.1. W admits
2.3.7.4.2. Introduce record of conviction (EE)
2.3.7.5. conviction not admissible if 1) pardon 2) pardon based on rehabilitation + no subsequent felony, or innocence
2.3.8. Prior bad acts involving untruthfulness
2.3.8.1. Confrontation on cross-examination is the only permissible means
2.3.8.1.1. Good faith basis + court discretion
2.3.8.2. EE: NOT permitted
2.4. Rehabilitation
2.4.1. Showing W's good character for truthfulness
2.4.1.1. When opponent attacks w's general bad character
2.4.2. Prior consistent statement
2.4.2.1. When W is charged with fabrication based on a recent motive + statement made before the motive arose
2.4.2.2. When statement rehabilitates a W impeached on another ground
3. Hearsay
3.1. Definition
3.1.1. Out-of-court statement of a person
3.1.2. Offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted
3.2. INADMISSIBLE unless an exception applies
3.2.1. Multiple hearsay - each statement meets exception, then admissible.
3.3. NOT Hearsay
3.3.1. Admissible
3.3.1.1. If not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted
3.3.1.1.1. Effect on listener or reader
3.3.2. Verbal Act. Legally operative fact
3.3.2.1. Contract offer or cancellation
3.3.3. Circumstantial evidence of Declarant's state of mind
3.3.4. W's prior statemnet
3.3.4.1. Hearsay, inadmissible
3.3.4.2. Exception, admissible
3.3.4.2.1. Prior statement fo identification
3.3.4.2.2. Made under oath and during a formal trial, hearing
3.3.4.2.3. Offered to rehabilitate the w
3.3.5. Opposing party's statement
3.3.5.1. Statement made by a party is admissible against that party
3.3.5.2. Adoptive statement
3.3.5.2.1. i.e. remaining silent
3.3.5.3. Vicarious opposing party statement
3.3.5.3.1. Statement 1) by agent/employee, 2) concerns matter within scope of agency/employment 3)
3.3.5.3.2. Statement by co-conspirator
3.4. Exception
3.4.1. Rule 804: Unavailable Declarant
3.4.1.1. Unavailability
3.4.1.1.1. Death or illness
3.4.1.1.2. Absence from jurisdiction
3.4.1.1.3. Privilege
3.4.1.1.4. Stubborn refusal
3.4.1.1.5. Lack of memory
3.4.1.2. Former Testimony
3.4.1.2.1. Admissible if 1) the party had an opportunity to cross-examine 2) Issue must be the same
3.4.1.3. Statement against interest
3.4.1.3.1. Against his pecuniary(money), proprietary(property), penal(criminal) interest
3.4.1.3.2. Distinguished from Opposing party statments
3.4.1.4. Dying declarations
3.4.1.4.1. Criminal: Homicide only; Civil: all types.
3.4.2. Rule 803 Exceptions
3.4.2.1. Do NOT require unavailability
3.4.2.2. Excited utterance
3.4.2.3. Present sense impression
3.4.2.3.1. Statement of pain, symptom being experienced, even not to a doctor is admissible
3.4.2.4. Present state of mind (Then-exist)
3.4.2.4.1. Includes the intent to do smth
3.4.2.4.2. Includes present physical condition
3.4.2.5. Statement for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment
3.4.2.5.1. Statement made to anyone concerning past or present symptoms or general cause of condition
3.4.2.6. Business Records
3.4.2.6.1. 1) Any type of business; 2) regular course of business; 3) regularly keeps 4) Made at or near the time of the event recorded 5) Observed by employees
3.4.2.7. Public records
3.4.2.7.1. Exception: Not admissible against the D in a criminal case.
3.4.3. Can't use "testimonial" hearsay statements against a criminal D if declarant is unavailable and had no opportunity for cross examination.
3.4.3.1. "Testimonial": sworn testimony, statement to police officers
3.4.3.2. Providing information to aid police in ONGOING emergency - nontestimonial
3.4.3.3. Help police gather info for eventual prosecution - testimonial
4. Privileges
4.1. Federal procedure issue
4.1.1. Federal court action arising under federal substantive law --> Apply federal common law
4.1.2. Diversity jurisdiction, Erie --> Privilege law of the state
4.2. Attorney-client privilege
4.2.1. Confidential communications
4.2.1.1. Intend confidentiality
4.2.1.2. Joint client: privileged as to third party, but doesn't apply between them
4.2.1.3. Doesn't apply to underlying info, pre-existing document or physical evidence
4.2.2. Between attorney and client
4.2.2.1. Includes representative of the attorney or client. Any agent reasonably necessary to facilitate the legal services
4.2.3. Made during professional, legal consultation
4.2.4. Unless waived or exception
4.2.4.1. Privilege continues after attorney-client relationship ends, even after death of client
4.2.4.2. Exceptions: 1) Future crime or fraud 2) Client puts legal advice in issue 3) Attorney-client dispute
4.3. Physician-patient privilege
4.3.1. Confidential communication or information acquired by physician from patient
4.3.2. For purpose of diagnosis or treatment of medical condition
4.4. Marriage
4.4.1. Criminal case ONLY, a spouse cannot be compelled to testify against the D
4.4.1.1. Can voluntarily testify
4.4.2. Any case, a spouse is not allowed to disclose confidential communication made during the marriage.
4.4.3. Exception: future crime or fraud; destructive of family unit
5. Witnesses
5.1. Requirement of competency: Personal knowledge; Oath or affirmation
5.2. Dead man Statute: In civil action, an interested party can't testify to support her interest against the estate concerning the TX between them
5.2.1. General rule: Witness is not ordinarily incompetent merely b/c she has an interest
5.3. Form of questioning
5.3.1. Suggest the answer "Isn't it a fact that ....."
5.3.1.1. Allow on cross-examination
5.3.1.2. NOT allow on direct examination, UNLESS
5.3.1.2.1. Preliminary / introductory
5.3.1.2.2. Youthful / forgetful witness (i.e. children)
5.3.1.2.3. Hostile witness
5.3.1.2.4. Adverse party
5.4. Writing in aid
5.4.1. Refreshing recollection
5.4.2. Safeguards against abuse
5.4.2.1. Refreshing happens before witness testifies, not entitiled but judge has discretion
5.4.3. Admissibility of content of document
5.4.3.1. 1) fails to jog memory; 2) W has personal knowledge; 3) Made or adopted by W when event was fresh; 4) W can vouch for accuracy
5.4.3.2. READ the writing to jury, cannot present exhibition unless the adverse party offers
5.5. Opinion testimony
5.5.1. Lay Witnesses: Drunk, speed, emotions
5.5.1.1. Admissible if 1) rationally base on W's perception; 2) Helpful; 3) Not specialized knowledge
5.5.2. Expert Witnesses
5.5.2.1. Basis of opinion
5.5.2.1.1. Certainty + 3 data sources: 1) personal knowledge 2) evidence in the trial record 3) fact reasonably relied upon by expert
5.5.2.2. Reliability (TRAP)
5.5.2.2.1. Testing of principles or methodology
5.5.2.2.2. Rate of error
5.5.2.2.3. Acceptance by experts in the same discipline
5.5.2.2.4. Peer review and publication
5.5.2.3. Learned Treatise
5.5.2.3.1. Prove truth; Impeach
5.5.2.3.2. Read into evidence only, may not introduced as an exhibit