Evidence

Evidence having a tendency to make the existance of a fac that is of consequence to the determiation of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

• Must be material: of consequence to the determinatio f teh action.
• Must be probative: makes the existence of the fact more or less probable.

When it's probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury (403)

If the photo is of the nature to incite passion or inflame the jury, the court must determine whether the danger of unfair prejudice substantially outweighs the exhibits probative value.

If they can form an instruction that will cure the prejudicial effect, they can admit evidence for one party or purpose, but not others.

Subsequent remedial measures/repairs, offers of settlement, pleas, possessing insurance.

Can't use subsequent measures to prove neglignece, defect, or need for warning, but can use them to prove other things like ownership, control, feasiblity of precautonary measures, or impeachment.

Can't use them to prove liability. but can use them to prove things like witness bias, lack of undue delay, or obstruction of criminal investigation.

withdrawn guilty pleas, nolo contendre pleas, statements in plea proceedings and discussions with prosecutors. Admissible if part of the plea discussions introduced by defense or in purjury prosecutions.

If prosecutor offers immunity, you can use that in court as the defense, either to show their case is weak or to show that you believe you are innocent.

• Generally, evidence of a persons character or trait is not admissible to prove they acted in conformity with that trait on a particular occasion.
• Exception: Character of the accused: criminal defendant can offer evidence of his own good character, but this opens the door to the prosecutor on that character trait.
• Exception: character of victim: Evidnece of a victim's character trait can be offered by accused, rebutted by prosecution, or the prosecution introduce evidence of the victim's peacefullness in a homocide case.

You can't use them to prove the character of a person to show they acted in conformity with that character. Can use them for proof of motive, intent, opportunity, preparation, plan, knowledge, or identity.

Must be reputation or opinion, only on cross examination can we get into specific instances of conduct.

Civil cases.

In a sexual assault case, the ban on propensity evidence is lifted, can use prior acts to prove propensity to commit future acts.

Evidence of a persons habit or the routine practice of an organization, is relevent to prove that their actions were in conformity with that habit on a particular occasion. Habit is proven by repeated response to the same specific situation, higly predictive, done frequently.

witness's truthful character, can only be opinion or reputation on direct, can cite specific instances of conduct on cross, but must be probative for witness's truthful character and can't use extrinsic evidence except to show bias.

Must not be criminal defendant, allowed if it's a felony, allowed if it's a crime invovling dishonesty or false statement, allowed is probative value for witness untruthful character outweights prejudice, not allowed after 10 years from conviction or date of release unless probative value substantially outweights prejudice.

Can't use prior sexual behavior to prove sexual character.

Out of Court

• Statement (oran written nonverbal
• conduct)

Intended as statement by declarant

• Offered in evidence to prove the
• truth of the matter asserted by the declarant.

• Impeachment, declarant's State of mind, verbal acts,
• effect on the listner

If the other side is the one who said it, hearsay can be brough in. Can't admit your own out of court statments, only other sides.

Person heard and understood, could respond, reaosnable for a person to deny if untrue, person did not deny.

Can be used for impeachment purposes if not said under oath, can be used on cross if under oath.

If unavaliable, their former testimony, statements made under belief of impending death, statements against their interest, and forfeiture by wrongdoing.

Present sense impressions, excidet utterance, then existing emotional or physical condition, medical diagonsis statements, recorded recollections (if they are originals) business records, public records, and reports.

Must be the description of an event concurrently or immediately after the event.

Must be a statmenet made related to a startling event or condition made when the declarant was under the excitement of the event.

It is admissible hearsay under then-existing state of mind.

If the witness one had knowledge but can't remember, they can use their recorded recollections to refresh their memory.

It's a catch all exception that is rarely used, basically allows hearsay if justice requires it.

Coming from the sixth amendment, some hearsay is banned against criminal defendants even if admissible. 2 prong test: Hearsay must be necessary and must be reliable.

If scienctific techical or specialized knowledge is necessary to assist the trier of fact with understanding the evidence, witness qualified by an expert may testify in the form of an opinion if the test is based on sufficent facts, the test is a product of reliable principles, and the expert applied the principels to the facts of the case.

Says that you must use the original document if you're trying to prove the content of that document is true. Exception: can use copy of no original exists anymore.

Evidence must be authenticated before it can be admitted into evidence, must prove that it is what it claims to be. public documents, official publications, and commercial publications are self-authenticating.

Attorney/client, husband/wife(only spouse being asked to testify can invoke) , doctor/patient, psychotherapist/patient