Basic Evidence and Trial Procedure. Opening Statement  Preview the evidence “The evidence will show”  Introduce theme  Briefly describe the issues,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Rules of Evidence and Objections
Advertisements

Chapter 8 Witnesses— Competency and Perjury.
Use of Prior Statements, Depositions and Corollary Proceedings: Searing Impeachment and Effective Rehabilitation FITZPATRICK,
CVLS Hearsay Refresher Who Cares About Hearsay? A Four-Step Hearsay Formula Hearsay Exceptions Questions.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS OF FORENSIC SCIENCE CHAPTER 2.
CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION P. JANICKE Chap Authentication2 AUTHENTICATION A SUBSET OF RELEVANCE AUTHENTICATION EVIDENCE IS –NEEDED BEFORE DOCUMENTS.
Hearsay and Its Exceptions
Common Trial Procedures United States. Opening Statements.
PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS FRE 801(d) Non Hearsay by definition Rule 801(d)(1) Prior Statement by Witness is not hearsay If declarant testifies and.
Minnesota State Bar Association High School Mock Trial Program State of Rigor v. Jess Dubois and Pat Dowling.
The Roles of Judge and Jury Court controls legal rulings in the trial Court controls legal rulings in the trial Jury decides factual issues Jury decides.
CJ227 Criminal Procedure Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 4 (Chapter 9 – Pretrial Motions, Hearings and Pleas) (Chapter.
Mock Trial Modified by Dennis Gerl from Evidence PPT by John Ed-Bishop
Evidence and Argument Evidence – The asserted facts that the arbitrator will consider in making a decision – Information – What is presented at the hearing.
Hearsay Exceptions Steven Magnone.
Writings and Authentication. Writing defined: FRE 1001(1) Evid. Code § 250 See also FRE (2)-(4)(defines photos, original and duplicate) and Evid. Code.
Please review for your quiz.
CHAPTER X HEARSAY EVIDENCE. Hearsay Evidence Evidence of a statement that was made other than by the witness while testifying that is offered to prove.
Motion for Summary Judgment The Keys to Success. How does this work?  Summary judgments are governed by Rule 166(a) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
Trial Preparation Washington & Lee School of Law October 19, 2006.
Confidential: Attorney-Client Privilege and Attorney Work Product Houston ● Dallas How to Offer and Exclude Evidence:
AJ 104 Chapter 5 Witnesses. 5 Issues Related to a Trial Witness 1. Who is competent to testify 2. How the credibility of a witness is attacked 3. What.
Trial advocacy workshop
OBJECTIONS IN COURT. WHAT ARE THEY? An attorney can object any time she or he thinks the opposing attorney is violating the rules of evidence. The attorney.
MBA Mock Trial Program. What is a Mock Trial?  Trial before a real judge (or lawyer)  Held in real courtroom (State Court)  Examination of witnesses.
MBA Mock Trial Program Mock Trial Basics Presentation by Jim and Josh McGuire Permission granted for any education use in connection with MBA Mock Trial.
Unit 3 Seminar! K. Austin Zimmer Any question from Unit 2! Please make sure you have completed your Unit 1 & 2 Papers!
EXCLUSIONS FROM HEARSAY Prior Inconsistent Statement, Prior Consistent Statements, Prior Identifications.
Presentation by Jim and Josh McGuire Permission granted for any education use in connection with MBA Mock Trial Program November 18, 2002 Pirated and modified.
Mon. Nov. 26. Work Product “Privilege” A witness, X, who is friendly to the D was interviewed by P’s attorney and a statement was drawn up Is there any.
CJ305 Criminal Evidence Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 8 (Chapter 10 – The Exclusionary Rule – ID Procedures) (Chapter.
Courtroom Protocol and Technology
Evidence in Court Holy Trinity Law Audrius Stonkus.
1 PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE Learning Domain PURPOSE FOR THE RULES OF EVIDENCE Protect the jury from seeing or hearing evidence that is: (w/b p. 1-3)
ANATOMY OF A TRIAL Opening Statements -1 st : Plaintiff -2 nd : Defendant Examinations -1 st : Plaintiff Witnesses -2 nd : Defendant Witnesses Closing.
 You must consider – is it worth doing?  Many times it is not worth it to impeach on collateral matters  Must be structured and simple  Why you impeach.
ARKANSAS LEGAL AID OCTOBER 17, 2013 BY MICHAEL JOHNSON AND PAULA CASEY EXHIBITS.
1 Ruling on Objections Presented by Peter K. Halbach, Chief Hearing Officer North Dakota Department of Transportation.
CJ305 Criminal Evidence Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 9 (Chapter 12 – Documents and the Right of Discovery) (Chapter.
1 Law of Evidence Mark Pollitt Associate Professor.
EVIDENCE ACT Law of evidence lay rules for the production of evidence in the court of law.
PROCEDURES IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, 8 th ed. Roberson, Wallace, and Stuckey PRENTICE HALL ©2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ
CJ305 Criminal Evidence Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 3 (Chapter 5 – Witnesses -- Lay & Expert) (Chapter 6 – Credibility.
Mock Trial Team Strategies and Formalities. Opening Statements 3 minutes Objective – Acquaint court with the case and outline what you are going to prove.
HEARSAY! BY MICHAEL JOHNSON. COMMON LAW DEFINITION “ An out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted”
CJ227: Criminal Procedure Unit 6 Seminar Mary K Cronin.
Attorney/Judge. The purpose of opening statements by each side is to tell jurors something about the case they will be hearing. The opening statements.
Hugh Finkelstein Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney 20 th Judicial District of Arkansas.
Mock Trial Rules of Evidence Arkansas Bar Association Mock Trial Committee Anthony L. McMullen, J.D., Vice Chair ( )
Direct Examination Direct is when you tell your side of the story
MBA Mock Trial Program Mock Trial Basics
WHAT IS EVIDENCE TESTIMONY OF WITNESSES DOCUMENTS
MBA Mock Trial Program Mock Trial Basics
Hearsay Hector Brolo Evidence, Law 16 Spring 2017.
J. Max Wawrik Nancy Rosado Colon Law 16 Spring 2017
AGENDA Brief Lecture on Chapters courtroom evidence and jury selections and juries Film, 12 angry men Written exercise
State of Oregon v. Willy Freeman
EVIDENCE—BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS
HEARSAY DEFINITIONS [RULE 801, PARED DOWN].
OBJECTIONS.
How Witnesses are Examined
EVIDENCE—BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS
Objections How, when, why…...
Civil Pretrial Practice
Rules of Evidence and Objections
CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION P. JANICKE 2010.
MBA Mock Trial Program Mock Trial Basics
Mock Trial Objections Part II.
Alison Chandler Hearsay Exceptions Continued Unavailability Former testimony Dying Declarations Declarations against.
Business Law Final Exam
Presentation transcript:

Basic Evidence and Trial Procedure

Opening Statement  Preview the evidence “The evidence will show”  Introduce theme  Briefly describe the issues, factual contentions

Relevance  Rule 401: “Relevant evidence” means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

Relevance  Rule 402 All relevant evidence is admissible, EXCEPT as otherwise provided in the Constitution of the United States, by Act of Congress, by these rules, or by other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.

Relevance  Rule 403 Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

Foundation  The word “foundation” is applicable in various contexts to describe prerequisites for the admission of evidence.  Generally, to show that evidence is admissible, counsel must first lay a foundation

Foundation—Common Examples  Personal Knowledge A fact witness must have personal knowledge as to any matter to which she testifies. (Rule 602)

Foundation—Common Examples  Authenticity Real exhibits and other physical evidence must be authentic; Rule 901: the requirement of authentication, or identification, is satisfied by “evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what is proponent claims”

Foundation—Common Examples  Hearsay Exceptions and Exclusions Establishing the requirements necessary for applicability of hearsay exceptions

Foundation—Common Examples  Privileged Information Circumstances giving rise to the privilege

Hearsay  Out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted

Rule 801. Definitions  Rule 801(a) A statement is  (1) an oral or written assertion OR  (2) nonverbal conduct of a person if it is intended by the person as an assertion  Rule 801(b) A “declarant” is a person who makes a statement.  Rule 801(c) “Hearsay” is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted

Hearsay Exceptions  Myriad of Hearsay Exceptions Roughly 30

Common Hearsay Exceptions  Availability of Declarant Irrelevant Party Opponent Admissions--FRE 801(d)(2) Prior Inconsistent statements--FRE 801 (d)(1)) Regularly Kept Records—FRE 803(6),(7) Present Sense impression--FRE 803(1) Then-existing mental, emotional, or physical condition--FRE 803(3) Excited Utterances--FRE 803(2) Recorded Recollection--FRE 803(5) Reputation—FRE 803(19), (20), and (21)

Common Hearsay Exceptions  Unavailability Required (FRE 804— describes what unavailable means) Former Testimony--FRE 804((b)(1) Statement Against Interest—FRE 804(b)(3)

Directing Witnesses  Generally, witnesses on direct are friendly and want to be helpful  Basic opportunity to make your case Emphasize your theme Select and emphasize favorable points Refute opposing side’s theory

Directing Witnesses  Generally cannot ask leading questions on direct (FRE 611) A leading question is one that suggests the answer (“The light was green, wasn’t it”?)  Ask “Who,” “What,” “When,” “Where,” “Why,” “How?” questions How were you dressed? What were the lighting conditions?

Common Objections to Direct  Leading  Calls for narrative  Assumes facts not in evidence  Counsel “testifying”  Asked and answered  Calls for speculation (“If he had provided the material, what would you have done?”)

Cross Examining Witnesses  Limited to Subjects covered during direct Matters affecting the witness’ credibility  Such as bias or motive to lie FRE 611  Should ask leading questions on cross (FRE 611 permits leading questions)

Cross Examining Witnesses  Impeachment with prior inconsistent statement (like deposition) Ask witness about the point (“The light was green, wasn’t it?”); if witness lies... Ask the witness if she recalls giving prior testimony (“You recall giving your deposition, under oath, in my office, don’t you”?) Read prior statement, citing the page number for opposing counsel. Ask witness to admit making statement.

Cross Examining Witnesses  If witness admits, impeachment complete  If witness denies, show her the statement to get him to agree  If she still denies, ask to have deposition introduced into evidence (authenticity should be stipulated to)

Common Objections to Cross- Examination  Outside the scope of direct examination  Argumentative  “Testifying” by counsel  Compound question  Assumes facts not in evidence or misleading—asking a question based on a premise that has not been established  Asked and Answered  Calls for Speculation

Moving “Real Exhibits” Into Evidence  Foundation requirement: A showing sufficient to support a finding that the document is what the proponent claims it is (FRE 901(a)) E.g., “This is the letter that I sent Mary on September 23, 2005”

Moving “Real Exhibits” Into Evidence  Mark the Exhibit Usually pre-marked Just say for the record: “This document has been marked, for identification purposes, as Plaintiff’s Exhibit 1”  Show to opposing counsel (if he does not have copy already)  Ask permission to approach witness

Moving “Real Exhibits” Into Evidence  Ask witness to identify the exhibit Might say: “Can you tell us what this exhibit is?” This is where foundation is laid  Offer the exhibit Might say: I offer the exhibit as Plaintiff’s Exhibit 1”  Court ordinarily asks if there’s an objection If opposing side does not think that proper foundation was laid, can object before it is admitted and cross- examine the witness on foundation May want to object for some other reasons—relevance, hearsay, etc.

Using Demonstrative Exhibits  Federal rules don’t deal with these (usually admitted if accurate and relevant) Foundation: the exhibit is a reasonably accurate depiction Must help the trier of fact understand the relevant facts  Examples: Models, maps, diagrams, charts  Technically not admitted because they are not evidence—used for illustrative purposes

Using Demonstrative Exhibits  Mark the exhibit  Show it to opposing counsel  Ask permission to approach witness  Ask witness if exhibit is accurate depiction Might say: “How does this scene compare to the scene that you observed at Washington & Nelson?” Witness: “It looks like the same.”  Offer the exhibit “Your honor, I would like to offer this as an accurate illustration of the scene at Washington & Nelson”  Use the exhibit

Closing Argument  Argue  Reinforce Theme