Admissibility of Evidence Quiz

Relevant evidence is admissible unless specifically excluded by a FRE rule.

This test weighs the probative value of evidence against its potential negative effects (like unfair prejudice).

Limits the jury's consideration of evidence to its intended purpose, reducing the risk of prejudice.

An out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of what it asserts.

Before applying a hearsay exception/exemption, ensure the Confrontation Clause is satisfied.

Generally not admissible unless highly probative of witness's credibility and the prosecution gives 10 days' notice before trial.

A party can question a witness about prior inconsistent statements for impeachment purposes. The opposing party must be notified and given a record of the statement.

A party can introduce extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement, even if not immediately raised.

In criminal cases, evidence of a victim's sexual behavior is generally inadmissible to protect them. In civil cases, it's admissible only if directly related to consent.

In criminal cases, evidence of a defendant's prior sexual assault crimes is admissible. In civil cases, use FRE 404.

Statements made during plea negotiations are inadmissible in subsequent criminal trials but are admissible in civil cases.

Everyone is presumed competent to testify unless a statute says otherwise. Mental/moral competency relates to the weight of testimony, not admissibility.

Rules of evidence differ between civil and criminal cases. In civil cases, evidence related to dishonesty or fraud is admissible. In criminal cases, prior convictions can be used to impeach credibility if relevant.

Testimony based on a witness's personal perception, helpful to understand the case, and not based on specialized knowledge.

Testimony from a qualified expert, based on scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge, that helps the jury understand evidence.

Older standard for admitting expert testimony, requiring the scientific method used to be generally accepted by the scientific community.

Current standard for admitting expert testimony, requiring the testimony to be helpful, based on sufficient facts and reliable methods. Used as a screening process.

Expert testimony is generally allowed even if it relates to the central issue of the case, except when stating the defendant's mental state in a criminal case.

Experts must have qualifications based on knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, usually established before trial to be recognized by the court.

Expert testimony must be based on reliable scientific or technical principles and methods applied correctly to the case facts.

Expert testimony must be based on sufficient facts and data to support the opinion.

Before testifying, a witness must take an oath or affirmation to tell the truth. This oath is designed to impress upon the witness the seriousness of their duty to be truthful.

The court has the power to control how witnesses are examined to ensure the process is fair and efficient, protect witnesses from harassment, and avoid wasting time.

Cross-examination is limited to the topics discussed during direct examination and matters affecting a witness's credibility. The judge may allow wider questioning.

Leading questions are generally not allowed during direct examination, as they can suggest answers to the witness. They are allowed in specific situations like cross-examination or when the witness is hostile.

The judge can call a witness to testify on their own or at the request of a party. The judge can also examine a witness regardless of who called them.

Upon request, the court can exclude witnesses from the courtroom to prevent them from hearing other witness testimony.

Certain individuals are exempt from the rule of witness exclusion, such as: parties, their designated representatives, essential persons for presenting evidence, and those authorized by law.

The rule helps to ensure the fairness and integrity of trial proceedings by preventing witnesses from tailoring their testimony based on what others have said.

A plea where the defendant doesn't admit guilt but accepts punishment. It's essentially a 'no contest' to the charges.

Conversations between a defendant and the prosecutor to try and settle a case without trial. This includes potential plea bargains.

This rule protects statements made during plea discussions from being used against the defendant in court, unless certain exceptions apply.

This is the process of demonstrating that a witness actually possesses personal knowledge about the events they are testifying about.

An exception to the hearsay rule allowing statements against a declarant's own interest, even if they are not present to testify, to be admitted as evidence. This applies to statements that could have exposed the declarant to civil or criminal liability, or that could have rendered a claim invalid.

An exception allowing statements about personal or family history, even if the declarant lacked direct knowledge, to be admitted as evidence if they were related to the person or intimately associated with their family and the information is likely accurate.

When a party's misconduct caused a declarant to be unavailable as a witness, the party cannot prevent the introduction of the declarant's prior statement as evidence.

The Sixth Amendment right of a criminal defendant to confront and cross-examine witnesses against them in court.

Statements made with the primary purpose of creating a record for future use in a criminal prosecution. These statements generally violate the Confrontation Clause unless the declarant is available for cross-examination.

Statements made for a purpose other than creating a record for future prosecution, like seeking immediate help. These statements generally do not violate the Confrontation Clause.

The process of proving that a piece of evidence is what it is claimed to be. This involves presenting sufficient evidence to support a finding that the evidence is genuine.

A rule requiring the original document to be presented as evidence, rather than a copy or description, whenever feasible.