California Bar Exam Lecture Notes - CA Evidence

5/31/2018 California Bar Exam Lecture Notes - CA Evidence

1/41

CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE


2/41

I. PRELIMINARY MATTERS

A. Which Law and Rules o E!idence A""l#$ Fede%al law and Fede%al Rules oE!idence &FRE' !s. S(a(e law and Calio%nia E!idence Code &CEC')Which Cou%(A%e You In*

1.MBE-ONLY Federal Law and FRE

2.Essays

a. Figure out which court you are in-FEDERAL (federal law and FRE aly! or"#A#E ($alifornia law and $E$ aly!%

b. #he fact attern will tell you whether to aly $E$ or FRE OR fact attern willtell you which court you are in& and then you will 'now which rules of eidence)ust *e alied%

(1) +Answe% acco%din, (o Calio%nia law.-- +uly ,.,& /uestion 01 Fe*,..& /uestion 21 +uly ,.& /uestion 01 +uly ,3& /uestion 01 Fe*,3& /uestion 0%

(2)+Answe% acco%din, (o (he Fede%al Rules o E!idence.-)Fe* ,.,&/uestion 0%

(3)4f 5uestion does not indicate which rules alyuse FRE% +uly ,6&/uestion 0%

NOTE$For the )ost art& the federal and $alifornia rules are ery si)ilar& although thewording )ay differ1 )any of the $alifornia rules contain clarifications or ela*orations ofthe rinciles found in the Federal Rules% 4f your )aterials do not descri*e or e7lain adifference& assu)e the law is the sa)e%

. C%i/inal &Li0e%(# a( s(a1e' o% Ci!il &22 a( s(a1e'$

1. For $R4M4NAL )atters in $AL4FORN4A "#A#E court& discuss P%o"osi(ion 3-the 8#ruth in Eidence9 a)end)ent to $alifornia% (Ma'es all releant eidencead)issi*le in a cri)inal case& een if otherwise o*:ectiona*le under the $E$&su*:ect to so)e e7cetions%!

C. Whe%e no %ule is discussed4 (he%e is NO DISTINCTION 0e(ween FRE and CEC. Reiew your MBE Eidence )aterials for rules and e7a)les%

2


3/41

II. RELEVANCE 5Ini(ial anal#sis in an# 6ues(ion)is (he e!idence %ele!an(*5

A. Definition; BO#< $E$ AND FRE; Eidence is releant if it has any tendency to)a'e the e7istence of any fact of conse5uence to the deter)ination of the action)ore or less ro*a*le than it would *e without the eidence%

. Distinction;

1. FRE$ Any fact- it need not *e a fact in disute%

2.

CEC$ Mus( "e%(ain (o a 7dis"u(ed ac(.7

E8AMPLE$=rosecution of conicted felon with a gun% 4f you stiulate to the factthat the erson is a conicted felon& this is no longer a disuted fact% #herefore&in $A state court& the fact that erson is a conicted felon is no longer releantsince it is not disuted& therefore& that fact is not ad)issi*le% 4n federal court& it

would still *e considered a releant fact& een though it is not disuted& andtherefore& ad)issi*le%

C. PROPOSITON 3$8#ruth in Eidence9 A)end)ent to $A $onstitution%1. ALL releant eidence is ad)issi*le in a cri)inal case& een if otherwise

o*:ectiona*le under the $E$& su*:ect to certain e7cetions%

2. E>$E=#4ON" #O =RO= ?; #hese o*:ections are NO# oerruled *y =ro ?;

a. $onfrontation clause (e7clusionary rule!

b.


4/41

E. P?LIC POLICY E8CL?SIONS TO RELEVANT EVIDENCE

1. Su0se6uen( Re/edial Measu%es$Eidence of safety )easures or reairs afteran accident is inad)issi*le to roe negligence%

a. FRE$E7clusion of su*se5uent re)edial )easure coers negligence AND"%oduc(s lia0ili(#@s(%ic( lia0ili(# cases.

b. CEC$E7clusion of su*se5uent re)edial )easures does NO# aly in strictlia*ility (roducts lia*ility! cases% Ne,li,ence onl#.

2. Oe% To Pa# Medical E"enses$Eidence of ay)ents or offers to ay )edicale7enses is inad)issi*le when offered to roe lia*ility for the in:uries in5uestion%

a. FRE$Only e7cludes offers to ay )edical e7enses& NO# any acco)anyingstate)ents%

NOTE$ Acco)anying state)ent could *e e7cluded under FRE if it was artof a settle)ent offer% ("ee *elow%!

b. CEC$Also )a'es acco/"an#in, s(a(e/en(s)ade along with offers to ay)edical e7enses inad)issi*le%

E8AMPLE$After a car accident& drier states; 8Dont worry it was )y fault& 4rear-ended you and 4 will ay your )edical e7enses%9

FRE$Only the offer to ay )edical e7enses is e7cluded and state)ent 84twas )y fault& 4 rear-ended you9 would *e ad)issi*le%

CEC$#he entire state)ent will *e e7cluded% $E$ rule is *roader%

E8AMPLE$After a car accident& drier states; 84f you sign a release& 4 will ayyour )edical e7enses *ecause it was )y fault 4 rear-ended you%9

nder *oth FRE and $E$& the entire state)ent will *e e7cluded-the offer to

ay )edical and the acco)anying state)ents--- as *oth are arts of theoffer to settle% nder $E$& een if not art of an offer to settle& theacco)anying state)ent to the offer to ay )edical e7enses is e7cluded%nder FRE& in order to e7clude the whole state)ent& it )ust *e art of asettle)ent offer%

3. Se((le/en( Oe%s$Both FRE and $E$ e7clude settle)ent offers andstate)ents )ade in connection with settle)ent offers for uroses of roinglia*ility& roided the clai) is disuted either as to alidity or a)ount%

a. FRE$Both FRE and $E$ e7clude settle)ent offers and state)ents )ade in

connection with settle)ent offers for uroses of roing lia*ility& roided theclai) is disuted either as to alidity or a)ount%

b. CEC$E7tends this rule to discussions and state)ents during /edia(ion%

4. Plea Ne,o(ia(ions$"o)e conersations in lea *argain discussions are notad)issi*le in a ciil or cri)inal case een if a lea agree)ent is not reached%

4


5/41

$onersations are considered riileged and therefore& inad)issi*le%

a. FRE$Li)ited to conersations with rosecutors%

b. CEC$$oers conersations with rosecutors AND (he "olice& as long asthey are state)ents )ade in the course of *ona fide lea negotiations%Doesnot include unsolicited offers to lead guilty& state)ent )ade to transorting

olice officers& sontaneous state)ents in court%

5. E"%essions o S#/"a(h#

a. FRE$No rule here%

b. CEC$4n a $44L case& $E$ also e7cludes the ad)ission of state)ents&writings& and *eneolent gestures e7ressing sy)athy relating to the ain&suffering or death of a erson inoled in an accident& which state)ents are)ade to the erson or their fa)ily% But state)ents of fault )ade in connection

with such an e7ression are NO# e7cluded%

E8AMPLE$After a car accident& drier states; 84 a) so sorry you are hurt& 4should not hae *een driing so fast and rear-ended you%9

FRE$#he entire state)ent would *e ad)issi*le%

CEC$84 a) so sorry9 is inad)issi*le as e7ression of sy)athy *ut 84 shouldnot hae *een driing so fast and rear-ended you9 is ADM4""4BLE *ecause itis releant eidence and not e7cluda*le as offer to ay )edical e7ense orsettle)ent offer or any other reason%

III. WITNESSES AND TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE

A. Co/"e(enc#

1. FRE$Eeryone is co)etent to *e a witness in federal court%

2. CEC$A erson is dis5ualified to *e a witness if he@she is;

a. incaa*le of e7ressing hi)self@herself concerning the )atter so as to *eunderstood& either directly or through interretation1 or

b. incaa*le of understanding the duty to tell the truth%

. Pe%sonal Bnowled,e$ nder *oth FRE and $E$& lay witnesses (not aearing ase7erts! can testify only a*out )atters of which they hae =ER"ONALNOLEDGE%

1. Must hae e7erienced so)ething through the fie senses%

C. Oa(h

1. FRE$ Before testifying& eery witness )ust ta'e an oath that he@she will testifytruthfully

2. CEC$Before testifying& eery witness )ust ta'e an oath that he@she will testifytruthfully E>$E=# if he@she is a;

5


6/41

a. $hild under the age of . or

b. Deendent erson with a su*stantial cognitie i)air)ent

May *e re5uired only to ro)ise to tell the truth%

D. ud,e and u%o%s As Wi(nesses

1. +udgea. FRE$=residing :udge a*solutely *arred fro) testifying as a witness in the

trial%

b. CEC$=residing :udge )ay testify as a witness& if no*ody o*:ects%

2. +ury

a. At trial@=re-erdict; FRE and $E$ are the "AME; A :uror )ay not testify as awitness at trial in front of the )e)*ers of the :ury%

b. After trial@=ost-erdict;

(1) FRE$+uror can only roide infor)ation regarding O#"4DE

influences that )ay hae affected the erdict& *ut cannot testify as to howthose influences affected their reasoning%

(2) CEC$More e7ansie than FRE;+urors can roide infor)ation on ANYi/"%o"%ie(ies o% inluences (ha( /a# ha!e aec(ed (he u%o%s& *ut stillcannot testify as to how those influences affected their reasoning%

E. Re%eshin, Recollec(ion

1.ritings

a. FRE$4f a witness uses a writing to refresh her recollection rior to testifying&the aderse arty is entitled to hae the writing roduced only if the court in itsdiscretion deter)ines that roduction of the docu)ent is necessa%# in (he

in(e%es(s o us(ice%b. CEC$#he writing /us(*e roduced at the hearing uon the re5uest of the

oosing arty%

(1) E7cetion; 4f the writing is not in the ossession or control of thewitness or the arty eliciting the testi)ony%

E8AM TIP$ ith refreshing recollection& loo' to see if hearsay e7cetionfor recorded recollection co)es into lay% BO#< FRE and $E$ roidee7cetion when the witness has insufficient resent recollection to testifyfully and accurately *ut recorded the facts at the ti)e or soon after theoccurrence%

#he written state)ent does not co)e in1 the witness )ust instead read itto the :ury&unless aderse arty offers state)ent as e7hi*it%

#he aderse arty has the right to (.! insect the recorded astrecollection1 (,! use it in cross-e7a)ination1 (0! show it to the :ury forco)arison1 and (H! introduce releant ortions of it into eidence%

2.


7/41

b. $E$; Dis5ualifies so)e witnesses who were hynotiIed to refreshrecollection& as descri*ed *elow;

(1) 4n ciil cases& witnesses who hae *een hynotiIed cannot testify%

(2) 4n cri)inal cases& a witness who has *een hynotiIed can testify if;

i% there is a written record of the witnessJs re-hynosisrecollection1

ii% the hynosis session was ideorecorded andconducted *y a licensed rofessional (and olice&rosecutor& or defense counsel are not resent!1 and

iii% the witness testifies only a*out things re)e)*ered*efore the hynosis%

(3) NOTE$A cri)inal defendant who has undergone hynosis can testifywithout restriction%

F. Founda(ional Ma((e%s$ +udge& as gate'eeer& deter)ines foundational )atters& i%e%ad)issi*ility& riileges& hearsay % % % *y a "%e"onde%ance o (he e!idence(i%e%)ore than C.K!% +udge decides what :ury will get to hear as eidence%

1. FRE$ +udge can )a'e findings on foundational facts *ased on ANY#


8/41

E8AMPLE$ 8Defendant was driing a*out ? )iles@hour% "he was *eing negligent indriing that fast9

Lay oinion a*out the seed; ADM4""4BLE

Legal conclusion a*out negligence due to seed; 4NADM4""4BLE%

. E"e%( O"inion$ =er)issi*le if;

1.


9/41

3. itness *eliees in oinion to reasona*le degree of certainty

4. Oinion is *ased on relia*le rinciles that were relia*ly alied%

5Loo1 o% scien(iic e!idence5

a. FRE$Daubertstandard

(1) +udge is ulti)ate gate'eeer

(2) Ve%# %es(%ic(i!e$#he "ure)e $ourt offered a list of factors(8#A=E"9! that could *e considered *y :udges when deter)ining therelia*ility of an e7erts oinion testi)ony%

b. CEC$Kelley/Frye; 4f noel scientific area@theory& )ust hae gained ,ene%alacce"(ancein the releant scientific co))unity%

NOTE$As a ractical )atter& there )ust *e a u*lished aellate oinion or afull-*lown eidentiary hearing on the area%

Kelley/Fryeis NO# A==L4$ABLE to non-scientific or )edical oinions%

5. Oinion suorted *y a roer factual *asis%

a. FRE$Generally& oinion cannot *e *ased on inad)issi*le eidence%

b. CEC$E7ert can *ase oinion on 4NADM4""4BLE eidence-e%g%


10/41

IV. CARACTER EVIDENCE &FRE :;:@ CEC GG;G'$

A. Me(hods o P%o!in, Cha%ac(e%$ (.! Reutation1 (,! Oinion1 (0! "ecific acts-rarely er)itted

1. FRE$a. Direct; Only reutation and oinion%

b. $ross; Reutation& oinion AND secific acts%

2. CEC$

a. Attac'ing Defendants $haracter (on cross or direct!; Only oinion andreutation%

b. Attac'ing icti)s $haracter; Reutation& oinion AND secific acts%

NOTE$Ma'e sure to re)e)*er which )ethods of roing character can *e used

in all scenarios under *oth FRE and $E$% #he aaila*le )ethods to roecharacter )ay differ *ased on whether it is on D4RE$# e7a)ination or $RO""e7a)ination or whether it is DEFENDAN#" or 4$#4M" character at issue%

. 9ene%al Rule$ nder *oth FRE and $E$& character eidence is inad)issi*le toroe conduct in confor)ity therewith%

1. E>$E=#4ON; 4f character is an essential ele)ent of clai) or defense (e%g%defa)ation& child custody& negligent suerision!%

NOTE$Eidence of character )ay *e ad)issi*le when offered for a urose other thanto show conduct in confor)ity with ones character- re)e)*er MIMIC%

C.$iil $ases;

M Mo(i!e

I Iden(i(#

M A0sence o Mis(a1e

I Iden(i(#

C Co//on Plan o% Sche/e#his includes 'nowledge& oortunity& and rearation%

10


11/41

1. FRE$ONE ADD4#4ONAL E>$E=#4ON where defendants character can *e usedto roe conduct in confor)ity;In a casewhere clai) is *ased on seual assaul(o% child /oles(a(ion& defendants rior acts of se7ual assault or child)olestation are ad)issi*le to roe defendants conduct in this case%

2. CEC$No additional e7cetions%

D. $ri)inal $ases;

1. 9ene%al Rule on E!idence o Deendan(s Cha%ac(e%$nder *oth FRE and$E$& the door to using character eidence to roe defendants conduct is$LO"ED at start of case% #he rosecution cannot *e the first to introducecharacter eidence& *ut if Defendant O=EN" the door *y introducing charactereidence E4#


12/41

FRE$Ad)issi*le-e7cetion for se7ual assault and child )olestation cases%

CEC$Ad)issi*le-e7cetion for se7ual assault and child )olestationcases%

E8AMPLE$Defendant is sued for da)ages in ciil suit arising out of raeof wo)an% =laintiff wants to introduce eidence of two rior conictions forse7ual assault%

FRE$Ad)issi*le-e7cetion for se7ual assault and child )olestation in ciilcases%

CEC$4nad)issi*le-NO e7cetion for se7ual assault and child )olestationin ciil cases%

E8AMPLE$Defendant is charged with a*using his )other& a senior

citiIen% =rosecution wants to introduce eidence of two rior conictionsfor assault of his father%

FRE$4nad)issi*le-door closed-no alica*le e7cetion%

CEC$Ad)issi*le-e7cetion for do)estic iolence and elder a*use%

2. Me%c# Rule$Both FRE and $E$ allow a cri)inal defendant to introduceeidence of good character that would *e inconsistent with co))ission of cri)e%#


13/41

b. CEC$

(1) here court has ad)itted eidence of icti)s character for !iolenceoffered *y accused& rosecution )ay offer eidence that accused hasiolent character (a narrower ersion of FRE!%

(a) Re)e)*er& when attac'ing 4$#4Ms character-whether on direct

or cross- ALL )ethods aaila*le- reutation& oinion AND secificacts%

E8AMPLE$Defendant is charged with assaulting a wo)an and clai)sself-defense% Defendant offers eidence of wo)ans iolent character%=rosecution wants to introduce eidence of defendants two rior

conictions for assault%

FRE$Ad)issi*le- court has ad)itted eidence of icti)s characteroffered *y accused& rosecution )ay offer eidence that accused has"AME character trait%

CEC$Ad)issi*le- court has ad)itted eidence of icti)s character for!iolenceoffered *y accused& rosecution )ay offer eidence thataccused has iolent character%

E8AMPLE$Defendant is charged with falsifying infor)ation on a loan

alication% Defendant clai)s the *an' )anager falsified the docu)entswithout his 'nowledge and offers eidence of *an' )anagers su*)ittingfalse ta7 returns% =rosecution wants to introduce eidence of defendantstwo rior conictions for er:ury%

FRE$Ad)issi*le- court has ad)itted eidence of icti)s characteroffered *y accused& rosecution )ay offer eidence that accused has"AME character trait (dishonesty!%

CEC$4nad)issi*le- the $E$ e7cetion is li)ited to icti)s character for!iolenceoffered *y accused& eidence of defendants dishonest character

trait is not ad)issi*le%

4. o/icide Case$ Vic(i/s Cha%ac(e%

a. FRE$4n a ho)icide case when defendant clai)s "ELF-DEFEN"E orintroduces any eidence that icti) was first aggressor& the rosecution )ayauto)atically offer eidence of the icti)s trait for eacefulness@noniolenceto re*ut eidence that the icti) was the first aggressor%

13


14/41

b. CEC$No si)ilar rule% "elf-defense clai) is not considered an attac' onicti)s character& so rosecutor canno(auto)atically offer charactereidence of icti)s eacefulness@noniolence%

5. Ra"e Shield Law$ FRE and $E$ rules are funda)entally the sa)e% =ro ? doesNO# aly to eidence *arred *y rae shield law%

a. 4n any ciil or cri)inal roceeding inoling alleged se7ual )isconduct&eidence offered to show the alleged icti)s se7ual *ehaior& se7ualredisosition& and other se7ual history is e7cluded% Alies for use asi)each)ent and character eidence%

b. E>$E=#;

(1) =ast acts with other eole to show that defendant was not the source ofse)en or in:ury%

(2) =ast acts with defendant that tend to show consent%(3) 4f e7clusion of eidence would iolate any constitutional right of the

defendant%

6. Deendan(s Pas( Seual Conduc((Reiew of rules discussed a*oe!

a. FRE$Ad)issi*le in cri)inal se7ual assault or child )olestation cases1Ad)issi*le in ciil cases of se7ual assault or child )olestation%

b. CEC$Ad)issi*le in cri)inal cases where defendant accused of se7ualassault& child )olestation& do)estic iolence& or elder a*use% INADMISSILEIN CIVIL CASES.

(1) "u*:ect to *alancing under "ection 0C,%

V. IMPEACMENT OF WITNESSES

4)each)ent )eans calling into 5uestion a witnesss credi*ility% #here are seeral)ethods to i)each including;

(.!$ontradiction

(,! =rior 4nconsistent "tate)ent

(0! Bias& 4nterest& or Motie

(H! =rior $onictions

(C! =rior Bad Acts

A. I/"each/en( # Con(%adic(ion$"i)ly )eans introducing eidence or testi)onythat contradicts what witness said%

E8AMPLE$itness testifies the house had a green e7terior% #esti)ony can *ei)eached *y another witness who testifies the house had a *lue e7terior%

14


15/41

. I/"each/en( # P%io% Inconsis(en( S(a(e/en(s$

NOTE$Re)e)*er if state)ent offered only to i)eachNo hearsay concerns% 4fstate)ent is *eing offered for truth of )atter asserted therein& need to considerhearsay (see )ore in deth discussion of hearsay issues *elow%!

1. FRE$4f rior inconsistent state)ent gien under oath at trial or deosition& it isecludedfro) hearsay rule and can *e ad)itted to roe truth of facts asserted%

2. CEC$"tate)ent is considered hearsay *ut there is a hearsay ece"(ionfor ALLinconsistent state)ents )ade *y witnesses& whether or not )ade under oath&and therefore& state)ent can *e ad)itted to roe truth of facts asserted%

E8AMPLE$itness stated reiously to a third arty that the house had a in'e7terior *ut at trial testified that the e7terior was green%

FRE$ =rior inconsistent state)ent to third arty can *e used to i)each

witnesss testi)ony *ut NO# to roe that the house was in'& *ecausestate)ent was not )ade under oath%

CEC$ =rior inconsistent state)ent to third arty can *e used to i)eachwitnesss testi)ony AND to roe that the house was in'%

E8AMPLE$itness stated in his deosition that the house had a in' e7terior*ut at trial testified that the e7terior was green%

FRE$ =rior inconsistent state)ent to third arty can *e used to i)eachwitnesss testi)ony AND to roe that the house was in'%

CEC$ =rior inconsistent state)ent to third arty can *e used to i)each

witnesss testi)ony AND to roe that the house was in'%

C. Reha0ili(a(ion o Wi(ness ?sin, P%io% Consis(en( S(a(e/en(s

1. FRE$ =rior consistent state)ents are ad)issi*le to REB# a charge of recentfa*rication or i)roer influence& )otie or *ias%

2. CEC$=rior consistent state)ents are ad)issi*le to reha*ilitate a witnessscredi*ility that has *een attac'ed with a rior inconsistent state)ent or with acharge of *ias or recent fa*rication& *ut ONLY 4F rior state)ent was )adeBEFORE incident giing rise to the challenge to the witnesss credi*ility (e%g% therior inconsistent state)ent& the *ias& or the clai)ed recent fa*rication%!

Te/"o%al li/i(a(ion.

D. I/"each/en( # P%io% Con!ic(ions

1. Felon# Con!ic(ions

a. FRE$

(1) False S(a(e/en(s; Felony conictions inoling alse s(a(e/en(s(er:ury&fraud! are ad)issi*le with no *alancing needed ece"(for oldconictions- o!e% G; #ea%s old%

15


16/41

(a) Oer . years; Balancing under FRE 23(*! not inad)issi*le toi)each unless the ro*atie alue su*stantially outweighs there:udicial effect (reerse H0!%

(2) Not false state)ents; Felony conictions NO#inoling falsestate)ents )ay *e ad)issi*le *ut su*:ect to the Rule :;< 0alancin, (es(

(i%e%& e7cluded if the ro*atie alue is su*stantially outweighed *y unfairre:udice!%

b. CEC$

(1) Mo%al Tu%"i(ude$All felonies inoling 8)oral turitude9 aread)issi*le *ut court M"# doRule 0alancin, (es( to )a'e sure thedanger of unfair re:udice does not su*stantially outweigh the ro*atiealue%

(2)No )oral turitude inoled-4NADM4""4BLE% Prop 8 does not make thesecrimes admissible in criminal cases because crimes must involve moralturpitude to be relevant for impeachment%

(a)Moral #uritude readiness to do eil

.! Most se7 cri)es

,! $ri)es of dishonesty (er:ury& grand theft& receiing stolenroerty& ta7 easion!

0! $ri)es of iolence (assault& *attery& )urder& )anslaughter& rae&sousal a*use& andalis)!

H! $ri)es against roerty (*urglary& arson!

C! Other serious cri)es (escae& drug sales& hit and run& 'idnaing&e7tortion& statutory rae!

(b)$ri)es NO# inoling )oral turitude

.! $ri)es inoling negligence or unintentional acts

,! 4noluntary )anslaughter

0! Drug ossession

(3) No au(o/a(ic G; #ea% (i/e li/i(on cri)es li'e under FRE%But $E$allows courts to *alance& which er)its consideration of any factor *earing

on ro*atie alue& including age of coniction%

E8AMPLE$Defendant testifies a*out his wherea*outs at the ti)e of the allegedoffense% =rosecution wants to offer eidence that Defendant reiously wasconicted of felony er:ury%

FRE$ Ad)issi*le to i)each defendant with no *alancing%

"te .; =rior coniction inoling dishonesty YE"

16


17/41

"te ,; Not )ore than . years old YE"

No "te 0@*alancingAd)issi*le%

CEC$ =ossi*ly ad)issi*le to i)each defendant& su*:ect to *alancing%

"te .; Moral #uritude YE" go to ste ,@*alancing%"te ,; Balance-does danger of unfair re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atiealue

NOTE$hen DEFENDAN# is the witness *eing i)eached& need to considerossi*ility that rior coniction )ay *e used@interreted as character eidence&tending to roe defendant acted in confor)ity with character& and need to weighthis as otential unfair re:udice co)ared to ro*atie alue (*alancing test!%#he cri)e with which defendant is charged in current case will *e i)ortant; 4fDefendant charged with assault and rior coniction *eing used for i)each)ent

is also for assault& higher ro*a*ility of unfair re:udice%

E8AMPLE$Defendant testifies a*out his wherea*outs at the ti)e of the allegedoffense% =rosecution wants to offer eidence that Defendant was conicted offelony er:ury in .332%

FRE$ =ro*a*ly 4NADM4""4BLE%

"te .; =rior coniction inoling dishonesty YE"

"te ,; Not )ore than . years old NO need to *alance& not auto)aticallyad)issi*le%

"te 0; #he %e!e%se*alancing test; 4nad)issi*le to i)each unless the ro*atiealue su*stantially outweighs the re:udicial effect% Burden on "%o"onen( o

e!idencein reerse *alancing test to show )ore ro*atie than re:udicialro*a*ly 4NADM4""4BLE%

CEC$ =ossi*ly ad)issi*le to i)each defendant& su*:ect to *alancing%

"te .; Moral #uritude YE" go to ste ,@*alancing%

"te ,; Balance- does danger of unfair re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atiealue Re)e)*er& no auto)atic . year ti)e li)it on cri)es li'e under FRE% But$E$ allows courts to *alance& which er)its consideration of any factor *earing

on ro*atie alue& including age of coniction%

E8AMPLE$Defendant testifies a*out his wherea*outs at the ti)e of the allegedoffense% =rosecution wants to offer eidence that Defendant reiously wasconicted of assault%

FRE$ =ossi*ly ad)issi*le to i)each defendant& su*:ect to *alancing%

"te .; =rior coniction inoling dishonesty NOgo to ste ,@*alancing%

17


18/41

"te ,; Balance- does danger of unfair re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atiealue

CEC$ =ossi*ly ad)issi*le to i)each defendant%

"te .; Moral #uritude YE"

go to ste ,@*alancing%"te ,; Balance- does danger of re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atiealue

E8AMPLE$Defendant testifies a*out his wherea*outs at the ti)e of the allegedoffense% =rosecution wants to offer eidence that Defendant reiously wasconicted of felony drug ossession%

FRE$ =ossi*ly ad)issi*le to i)each defendant& su*:ect to *alancing%

"te .; =rior coniction inoling dishonesty NOgo to ste ,@*alancing%

"te ,; Balance- does danger of unfair re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atiealue

CEC$ 4NADM4""4BLE to i)each defendant%

"te .; Moral #uritude NO 4nad)issi*le%

2. Misde/eano% Con!ic(ions

a. FRE$

(1) False S(a(e/en(s; )isde)eanor conictions inoling alse s(a(e/en(s(er:ury& fraud! are ad)issi*le with no *alancing needed ece"(for oldconictions- o!e% G; #ea%s old% Same rule as felony convictions.

(a) Oer . years; Balancing under FRE 23(*! not inad)issi*le toi)each unless the ro*atie alue su*stantially outweighs there:udicial effect (reerse H0!%

(2) Not false state)ents; Misde)eanor conictions NO#inoling falsestate)ents are 4NADM4""4BLE%

b. CA$$E$ )a'es )isde)eanor conictions inad)issi*le B# =ro ? *ringsthe) *ac' into lay for $R4M4NAL cases only%

NOTE$ #his is the rule under $alifornia state law-=ro ?- *ut it is NO#ursuant to the $alifornia Eidence $ode% #hat is why this section has staterule denoted *y 8$AL9 and not 8$E$%9

(1) $iil cases; 4NADM4""4BLE(=ro ? has no alication to ciil cases%!

(2) $ri)inal cases; =ro ? in lay%

(a) Mo%al Tu%"i(ude$All felonies inoling 8)oral turitude9 aread)issi*le *ut court M"# doRule 0alancin, (es( to )a'e surethe danger of unfair re:udice does not su*stantially outweigh thero*atie alue%

(b) No )oral turitude inoled-4NADM4""4BLE% Prop 8 does not make

18


19/41

these crimes admissible in criminal cases because crimes mustinvolve moral turpitude to be relevant for impeachment.

Same rule as felony convictions.

E8AMPLE$4n a ciil action for negligence& Defendant testifies a*out therecautions he too' leading u to the accident resulting in in:ury to =laintiff%=laintiff wants to offer eidence that Defendant reiously was conicted of)isde)eanor charge of falsifying infor)ation on loan docu)ents%

FRE$ Ad)issi*le to i)each defendant%

"te .; =rior coniction inoling dishonesty and not )ore than . years oldYE"

No "te ,@*alancing

CEC$ 4NADM4""4BLE to i)each defendant% Misde/eano% con!ic(ionsinad/issi0le in CIVIL cases.

E8AMPLE$Defendant is *eing rosecuted for *urglary and testifies a*out hiswherea*outs on the night in 5uestion% =rosecution wants to introduce)isde)eanor coniction for etty theft%

FRE$ 4NADM4""4BLE to i)each defendant%

"te .; =rior coniction inoling dishonesty and not )ore than . years old NO

No "te ,@*alancing 4NADM4""4BLE; Because it is a misdemeanorconictionnot inoling dishonesty& it is not ad)issi*le to i)each%

NOTE$Many theft cri)es do NO# inole dishonesty (theft& ro**ery& *urglary!*ut theft cri)es inoling so)e lying (e)*eIIle)ent& theft *y false retenses! doinole dishonesty%

CAL$ =ossi*ly ad)issi*le& su*:ect to *alancing test%

Re)e)*er& under Eidence code )isde)eanors are inad)issi*le to i)eachB# =ro ? )a'es all releant eidence ad)issi*le for $R4M4NAL cases only%

"te .; Moral #uritude YE" go to ste ,@*alancing%

"te ,; Balance- does danger of re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atiealue

=re:udicial and ro*atie considerations; (.! Danger of rior coniction *eingused as i)roer character eidence since theft cri)e si)ilar to *urglary and

witness in 5uestion is defendant1 (,! consider age of the coniction%

3. ?se o E(%insic E!idence$nder *oth FRE and $E$& if the coniction isotherwise ad)issi*le& e7trinsic eidence can *e used to roe the coniction%

19


20/41

E. I/"each/en( # P%io% ad Ac(s

1. FRE$

a. T%u(hulness$Must *ear on truthfulness or lac' thereof of witness%

b. $iil AND cri)inal cases%

c. "u*:ect to *alancing test%

d. NO e7trinsic eidence& can 5uestion witness on cross-e7a)ination%

2. CAL$=rior *ad acts@non-conictions are inad)issi*le to i)each under Eidence$ode1 B# =ro ? )a'es the) ad)issi*le in cri)inal cases& if they are releant%

a. Mo%al Tu%"i(ude$#o *e releant the )isconduct )ust *e act of )oralturitude%

b. Only $R4M4NAL cases% Prop 8 has no application to civil cases.

c. "u*:ect to *alancing test%

d. E(%insic e!idenceand cross-e7a)ination can *e used%

E8AMPLE$4n a ciil action for negligence& Defendant testifies a*out the

recautions he too' leading u to the accident resulting in in:ury to =laintiff%=laintiff wants to offer eidence that Defendant lied on his DM alicationsaying he neer suffered an eiletic seiIure%

FRE$ =ossi*lyad)issi*le to i)each defendant& su*:ect to *alancing test%

"te .; =rior Bad Act inoling truthfulness YE"

"te ,; Balancing- does danger of re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atiealue

Me(hod$ =laintiff can as' Defendant on cross-e7a)ination 8Didnt you lie onDM alication9

CAL$ 4NADM4""4BLE to i)each defendant%Eidence code does not recogniIe non-coniction *ad acts as er)issi*le)ethod of i)each)ent and =ro ? has no alication to ciil cases%

E8AMPLE$Defendant is *eing rosecuted for securities fraud and deniesfalsifying any docu)ents% =rosecution wants to offer eidence that Defendantlied on his DM alication saying he neer suffered an eiletic seiIure% henas'ed whether he lied& Defendant says 8no%9 =rosecution wants to offer into

20


21/41

eidence DM records and Defendants )edical records%

FRE$ =ossi*lyad)issi*le to i)each defendant& su*:ect to *alancing test%

"te .; =rior *ad act inoling truthfulness YE"

"te ,; Balancing- does danger of re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atie

alueMe(hod$ =rosecution can as' Defendant on cross-e7a)ination 8Didnt you lie onDM alication9 B# when Defendants says 8No&9 rosecution is stuc' withthat answer% No e(%insic e!idenceer)itted to roe lying on DMalication%

CAL$ =ossi*lyad)issi*le to i)each defendant& su*:ect to *alancing test%

"te .; 4s this a cri)inal case YE"% =ro ? can roide for i)each)ent withnon-conictions *ut only alies to cri)inal cases%

"te ,; =rior *ad act inoling )oral turitude YE"

"te 0; Balancing- does danger of re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atiealue

Me(hod$ =rosecution can as' Defendant on cross-e7a)ination 8Didnt you lie onDM alication9 hen Defendants says 8No&9 rosecution is a*le to introducee(%insic e!idence(DM records& )edical records! to roe the rior *ad act%

E8AMPLE$Defendant is *eing rosecuted for securities fraud and deniesfalsifying any docu)ents% =rosecution wants to offer eidence that Defendantstole fro) a reious e)loyer%

FRE$ 4NADM4""4BLE%

"te .; =rior *ad act inoling truthfulness NO- theft does not inoletruthfulness%

4NADM4""4BLE

CAL$ =ossi*lyad)issi*le to i)each defendant& su*:ect to *alancing test%

"te .; 4s this a cri)inal case YE"% =ro ? can roide for i)each)ent withnon-conictions *ut only alies to cri)inal cases%

"te ,; =rior *ad act inoling )oral turitude YE"- )oral turitude is *roaderthan federal rule a*out truthfulness%

"te 0; Balancing- does danger of re:udice su*stantially outweigh ro*atiealue

NOTE$Re)e)*er that where Defendant is the witness& rior *ad act introducedfor i)each)ent has added ris' of undue re:udice as *eing used as i)roercharacter eidence- trier of fact )ay *eliee *ecause Defendant stole *efore heis )ore li'ely to co))it securities fraud% #he )ore si)ilar the charged offenseand the rior *ad act (or coniction!& the higher the ris' of undue re:udice%

21


22/41

VI. EARSAY

A. P%eli/ina%# Ma((e%s

1. Deini(ion$ (.! Out of court state)ent (,! offered for the truth of the )atter

asserted%2. u%den$

a. FRE$ O*:ecting arty has *urden to roe it is hearsay%

b. CEC$=roonent of the eidence has *urden to roe it is not hearsay%

3. Eclusions@Ece"(ions$

a. FRE$Both e7clusions (nonhearsay! and e7cetions to the hearsay rule%

b. CEC$Only e7cetions to the hearsay rule%

4. P%o" 3$


23/41

2. Fo%ei(u%e doc(%ine(*oth FRE and $E$!; Declarant is not dee)ed unaaila*leas a witness if the unaaila*ility is due to the actions of the roonent of astate)ent o% (he "u%"ose o "%e!en(in, (he wi(ness %o/ a((endin, o%(es(i#in,%

3. C%awo%d@Con%on(a(ion Clause$BO#< FRE and $E$; Re)e)*er the 2

th

A)end)ent- $onfrontation $lause issue in a cri)inal case where the declarantis unaaila*le; 8testi)onial9 hearsay state)ents will *e inad)issi*le unless thedefendant is gien an oortunity to cross-e7a)ine the declarant% #herefore&een if hearsay law under either FRE or $E$ does not )a'e the eidenceinad)issi*le& the "ure)e $ourt case of ra!fordand the $onfrontation $lauseanalysis )ay )a'e the eidence inad)issi*le%

a. Loo' for;

(1) $ri)inal case%

(2) At trial& declarant not aaila*le to testify%

(3)"tate)ent is 8testi)onial%9

(a) "tate)ents to rosecution and so)e to olice& includes such thingsas (.! u*lic records used against defendant1 (,! a state)ent duringolice interrogation& and (0! collecting infor)ation fro) an infor)ant%

(b) 8Non-testi)onial eidence9 includes situations where the ri)aryurose of the state)ent is to aid olice during an ongoing e)ergency%

(4) Defendant had no chance to cross-e7a)ine declarant when state)entwas )ade%

C. D#in, Decla%a(ion Ece"(ion

1.FRE$a. "tate)ents )ade *y a declarant who *eliees he@she is a*out to die%

b. "tate)ent descri*es the cause or circu)stances surrounding his@heri)ending death%

c. Declarant is ?NAVAILALE- *ut does not hae to *e dead%

d. Ad)issi*le in any ci!il ac(ion and in a ho/icide "%osecu(ion%

2. CEC$

P P%i!ile,e

R Reusal

I Inca"a0ili(#

S Su0"oena

M Me/o%#

23


24/41

a. "tate)ents )ade *y a declarant who *eliees he@she is a*out to die%

b. "tate)ent descri*es the cause or circu)stances surrounding his@heri)ending death%

c. Declarant is DEAD%

d. Ad)issi*le inallci!il and c%i/inal cases.

D. Fo%/e% Tes(i/on# Ece"(ion

1. FRE$ For)er testi)ony not e7cluded *y hearsay rule if;

a. Declarant unaaila*le%

b. Declarant )ade state)ent under oath- so)e roceeding or deosition (doesnot aly to grand :ury testi)ony!%

c. =arty against who) testi)ony is offered had o""o%(uni(# and /o(i!e (oea/inedeclarant%

(1) $ri)inal case; =arty against who) testi)ony is offered )ust hae *eenarty in reious roceeding% 4f not4NADM4""4BLE%

(2) $iil case; =arty in reious case OR redecessor-in-interest was aarty (so)eone with close riity-tye relationshi and si)ilar )otie!% 4f

not4NADM4""4BLE%

2. CEC$

a. Declarant unaaila*le%

b. Declarant )ade state)ent under oath- so)e roceeding or deosition (doesnot aly to grand :ury testi)ony!%

c. =arty against who) testi)ony is offered had o""o%(uni(# and /o(i!e (o

ea/inedeclarant%

(1) $ri)inal case; =arty against who) testi)ony is offered )ust hae *een

arty in reious roceeding% 4f not4NADM4""4BLE%

(2) $iil case; =arty in reious case OR "a%(# in ea%lie% "%oceedin, hadSIMILAR INTERESTS (=riity NO# re5uired! for oortunity and )otie to

e7a)ine% 4f not4NADM4""4BLE%

E8AMPLE$ +on and +ane were in:ured in a car accident% +on sued car)anufacturer for in:uries resulting fro) defectie design of air *ag% E7erttestified for car )anufacturer% E7ert has since left the country and isunaaila*le for further testi)ony% +ane sues car )anufacturer for in:uries

24


25/41

resulting fro) defectie design of air *ag% $ar )anufacturer offers E7ertstesti)ony in +anes case%

FRE$4NADM4""4BLE% +ane was not a arty in the first case and she and +onare not in riity& +on is not her redecessor-in-interest& so for)er testi)ony

of E7ert cannot *e ad)itted and used against +ane%

CEC$Ad)issi*le% +ane was not a arty in the first case *ut she and +on haesi)ilar interests- and therefore si)ilar )otiation to e7a)ine the E7ert% Noriity re5uire)ent under $E$ and for)er testi)ony of E7ert can *ead)itted and used against +ane%

d. For)er testi)ony is offered against the erson who offered it in eidence inher own *ehalf in the earlier roceeding& or against a successor in interest ofsuch erson%

E8AMPLE$ First roceeding was an ad)inistratie hearing for wage andla*or clai)s against car )anufacturer% $ar )anufacturer offered E7ertstesti)ony in that case% E7ert has since left the country and is unaaila*le forfurther testi)ony% +on sues car )anufacturer for in:uries resulting fro)defectie design of air *ag% +on offers E7erts testi)ony fro) thead)inistratie hearing%

FRE$4NADM4""4BLE% #he two cases are too different- $ar )anufacturer didnot hae the sa)e oortunity and )otie to e7a)ine E7ert in *oth casessuch that the testi)ony fro) first case can *e used in the second case%

CEC$Ad)issi*le% hen eidence is offered AGA4N"# the erson whooriginally offered it into eidence- here& the car )anufacturer- $E$ does notcare a*out si)ilar )otiation to e7a)ine%Een if cases are ery distinct& if car)anufacturer thought E7ert testi)ony was good enough to introduce it in thefirst case& it is good enough to *e used against car )anufacturer in thesu*se5uent case%

E. P%io% Inconsis(en( S(a(e/en(s &Re!iew %o/ V.. I/"each/en( 0# P%io%Inconsis(en( S(a(e/en(s'

1. FRE$4f rior inconsistent state)ent gien under oath at trial or deosition& it isecludedfro) hearsay rule and can *e ad)itted to roe truth of facts asserted%

25


26/41

2. CEC$"tate)ent is considered hearsay *ut there is a hearsay ece"(ionfor ALLinconsistent state)ents )ade *y witnesses& whether or not )ade under oath&and therefore& state)ent can *e ad)itted to roe truth of facts asserted%

F. P%io% Consis(en( S(a(e/en(s &Re!iew %o/ V.C. Reha0ili(a(ion 0# P%io%Consis(en( S(a(e/en(s'$ 4f rior consistent state)ents are otherwise ad)issi*le onthe issue of witness credi*ility& they are also ad)issi*le to roe the truth of theircontent%

1. FRE$ =rior consistent state)ents are ad)issi*le to REB# a charge of recentfa*rication or i)roer influence& )otie or *ias% Nonhea%sa#.

2. CEC$=rior consistent state)ents are ad)issi*le to reha*ilitate a witnessscredi*ility that has *een attac'ed with either a rior inconsistent state)ent or witha charge of *ias or recent fa*rication& *ut ONLY 4F rior state)ent was )adeBEFORE incident giing rise to the challenge to the witnesss credi*ility (e%g% the

rior inconsistent state)ent& the *ias& or the clai)ed recent fa*rication%!Te/"o%al li/i(a(ion. Ece"(ion (o (he hea%sa# %ule.

9. Pa%(# Ad/ission$ nder *oth FRE and $E$& a arty ad)ission is a state)ent *y aarty& or so)eone whose state)ent is attri*uta*le to a arty& offered *y a artyoonent%

FRE$Nonhearsay%

CEC$


27/41

FRE$Ad)issi*le as nonhearsay- icarious arty ad)ission )ade *y e)loyee anda )atter within the scoe of e)loy)ent AND )ade during e)loy)entrelationshi%

CEC$Ad)issi*le as hearsay e7cetion- state)ent )ade *y e)loyee whoseconduct )a'es the e)loyer icariously lia*le under the rincile of resondeat

suerior (negligent act of e)loyee )a'es e)loyer lia*le for negligence%!

E8AMPLE$ $usto)er at 4IIys 4ce $rea) slis on a uddle created fro) thelea'ing air conditioner% =laintiff testifies 4IIys e)loyee said 8#hat air conditioner isalways lea'ing and the )aintenance )an should hae fi7ed it%9

FRE$Ad)issi*le as nonhearsay- icarious arty ad)ission )ade *y e)loyee anda )atter within the scoe of e)loy)ent AND )ade during e)loy)entrelationshi%

CEC$4NADM4""4BLE% Not e7e)t fro) hearsay rule as icarious arty ad)ission*ecause the state)ent was not )ade *y the e)loyee whose conduct )a'es the

e)loyer icariously lia*le under the rincile of resondeat suerior% #he sea'erdid not do the negligent act%

. Decla%a(ion A,ains( In(e%es(

1. FRE$ A state)ent *y an NAA4LABLE declarant is ad)issi*le if& at ti)e it was)ade& it was against the financial or cri)inal interest of the declarant (againstroriety or ecuniary interest& or e7ose the declarant to ciil or cri)inallia*ility%!

a. here defendant see's to introduce such a state)ent to e7culate hi)self orinculate others& the state)ent )ust *e corro*orated to *e ad)issi*le as

declaration against interest%

2. CEC$A state)ent *y an NAA4LABLE declarant is ad)issi*le if& at the ti)e itwas )ade& it was against the financial or cri)inal interest of the declaranto% (hes(a(e/en( was a,ains( (he social in(e%es( o (he decla%an( 0ecause i( %is1ed/a1in, decla%an( an o0ec( o +ha(%ed4 %idicule4 o% social dis,%ace in (heco//uni(#.-" rule is broader than F#"%

3. Pa%(# Ad/ission !s. Decla%a(ion A,ains( In(e%es(

a. naaila*ility is NO# re5uired for arty ad)ission1 unaaila*ility is re5uiredfor declaration against interest%

b. =arty ad)ission ONLY for arties1 declaration against interest can co)e in forany declarant who )eets the re5uire)ents%

I. S(a(e o Mind Ece"(ions) A!aila0ili(# o Decla%an( IMMATERIAL

27


28/41

1. Eci(ed ?((e%ance@S"on(aneous S(a(e/en(

a. FRE)Eci(ed ?((e%ance$"tate)ents that (.! relate to a startling eent orcondition& and (,! were )ade sontaneously while the declarant was underthe stress of e7cite)ent caused *y such eent& (0! need NO# *e i))ediateor sontaneous& if still under the condition of e7cite)ent& e7cited utterance

e7cetion will still aly%b. CEC)S"on(aneous S(a(e/en($State)ent (.! )ust urort to narrate&

descri*e or e7lain an act& condition& or eent erceied *y the declarantAND (,! was )ade sontaneously while the declarant was under the stress ofe7cite)ent caused *y such ercetion%

NOTE$hile the FRE and $E$ )ay use different language& thesee7cetions are effectiely the sa)e% Loo' out for state)ents with e7cla)ation)ar's (89! to indicate this hearsay e7cetion )ay *e alica*le%

2. P%esen( Sense I/"%ession@Con(e/"o%aneous S(a(e/en(

a. FRE)P%esen( Sense I/"%ession$"tate)ent )ade *y the declarantdescri*ing or e7laining an eent or condition )ade while or i))ediately aftererceiing it% Does not need to *e 8e7cited9 *ut needs to *e )ade while ori//edia(el#after erceiing%

b. CEC)Con(e/"o%aneous S(a(e/en($"tate)ent offered (.! to e7lain&5ualify& or )a'e understanda*le conduct of the declarantAND (,! )ade

while the declarant was engaged in such conduct% Declarants words whiledoing so)ething or e7eriencing so)ething are ad)issi*le under this

e7cetion& if the declarant is descri*ing his or her ownconduct at the ti)e%$his e%ception is much more narro! than the F#" present sense impressione%ception to the hearsay rule.

#his e7cetion is generally for er*al acts of legal significance& such as thedeclarants intent to create a gift or a trust%

E8AMPLE$#he e7ecutor of Grand)as estate sues A)y to recoerGrand)as dia)ond ring% A)y resents the testi)ony of George who says hesaw Grand)a hand A)y the ring and say& 84 want you to hae this%9

NOTE$ $E$ conte)oraneous state)ent e7cetion focuses on thedeclarants su*:ectie intent regarding the act& while the FRE resent sensei)ression e7cetion includes state)ents descri*ing E>#ERNAL heno)enaerceied *y the declarant% nder FRE& conte)oraneous state)entsreflecting the declarants state of )ind regarding his own conduct are notconsidered hearsay& so no e7cetion needed%

3. S(a(e/en( Desc%i0in, Inlic(ion o% Th%ea( o Ph#sical A0use$ The O

28


29/41

Exception- Calio%nia Onl#

a. Re5uire)ents;

(1)NAA4LABLE declarant1

(2)"tate)ent descri*ing or e7laining infliction or threat of hysical a*use1

(3) Made at or near ti)e of in:ury or threat1(4) 4n writing& recorded& or )ade to olice or )edical rofessionals1

(5) nder trustworthy circu)stances%

b. #his e7cetion was *asis for ad)itting calls fro) Nicole "i)son to thedo)estic a*useshelter in the ciil trial of O+ "i)son%

c. C%awo%d@Con%on(a(ion Clause Conside%a(ion$4f a state)ent is )ade toolice and could *e considered 8testi)onial&9 raise the $rawford issue- the-state)ent could still *e inad)issi*le& een though it 5ualifies for the O+hearsay e7cetion& *ecause it )ay iolate the confrontation clause under$rawford%

E8AMPLE$ Girlfriend calls 3.. and screa)s& 8My *oyfriend :ust ulled a gunon )e9 Defendant (*oyfriend! is later charged with assault% Girlfriend diesfro) in:uries% =rosecution wants to ad)it 3.. tae to roe Defendant had agun%

FRE$Ad)issi*le% #his li'ely 5ualifies under two e7cetions; E7citedtterance; (.! relates to a startling eent or condition& and (,! was )adesontaneously while the declarant was under the stress of e7cite)ent%=resent "ense 4)ression; "tate)ent )ade *y the declarant descri*ing or

e7laining an eent or condition )ade while or i))ediately after erceiing it%#he word 8:ust9 indicates state)ent is i))ediately after erceiing eent%

CEC$Ad)issi*le as "ontaneous "tate)ent e7cetion- (.! urorts tonarrate& descri*e or e7lain an act& condition& or eent erceied *y thedeclarant AND (,! was )ade sontaneously while the declarant was underthe stress of e7cite)ent caused *y such ercetion% Note that the narrower$E$ $onte)oraneous state)ent e7cetion would NO# aly here *ecausedeclarant is not descri*ing her own conduct% 4t could ossi*ly *e ad)issi*leunder the O+ e7cetion as well- see discussion under ne7t e7a)le%

E8AMPLE$ Girlfriend calls 3.. and cal)ly says& 8An hour ago& )y *oyfriendulled a gun on )e%9 Defendant (*oyfriend! is later charged with assault%Girlfriend dies fro) in:uries% =rosecution wants to ad)it 3.. tae to roe

29


30/41

Defendant had a gun%

FRE$4NADM4""4BLE% E7cited tterance; Does not 5ualify% ord 8cal)ly9indicates declarant was NO# under the stress of e7cite)ent% =resent "ense4)ression; Does not 5ualify- 8an hour ago9 indicates that the state)ent was

not )ade while or i))ediately after erceiing the eent%

CEC$=ro*a*ly ad)issi*le under the O+ e7cetion% Re5uire)ents; (.!NAA4LABLE declarant- girlfriend died1 (,! "tate)ent descri*ing ore7laining infliction or threat of hysical a*use1 (0! Made at or near ti)e ofin:ury or threat- an hour ro*a*ly 5ualifies as 8at or near91 (H! 4n writing&recorded& or )ade to olice or )edical rofessionals- 3.. call 5ualifies1 (C!nder trustworthy circu)stances%

4s there a $rawford@$onfrontation $lauses concern here No& *ecausestate)ent was to 3..& not to olice or rosecutor and therefore not8testi)onial9 so $rawford@$onfrontation $lause analysis is inalica*le& *ut)a'e sure to raise $rawford concern in these conte7ts%

. S(a(e/en(s o Men(al o% Ph#sical Condi(ion

1. Ece"(ion o% decla%a(ion o (hen eis(in, "h#sical o% /en(al condi(ion$

a. nder *oth FRE and $E$& state)ent of declarants then e7isting hysical or)ental condition or state of )ind (=RE"EN# #EN"E! is ad)issi*le to showthe condition or state of )ind% No need to show declarant unaaila*le%

b. "tate)ent descri*ing =A"# hysical or )ental condition- as )e)ory or *elief- is not ad)issi*le to roe the fact re)e)*ered or *elieed under thise7cetion%

2. Ece"(ion o% s(a(e/en( o "as( o% "%esen( /en(al o% "h#sical condi(ion/ade o% /edical dia,nosis o% (%ea(/en(.

a. FRE$ A state)ent descri*ing "as( OR "%esen()ental or hysical conditionof the declarant or of another erson is ad)issi*le if )ade for and ertinent to/edical dia,nosis o% (%ea(/en(% No need to show declarant unaaila*le%

b. CEC$A state)ent of ast OR resent )ental or hysical condition is

ad)issi*le if )ade for )edical diagnosis or treat)ent& *utonl# i &G' (hedecla%an( was G> #ea%s old o% #oun,e% when s(a(e/en( was /ade AND&>' desc%i0in, an ac( o child a0use o% ne,lec(. No need to show declarantunaaila*le% $his e%ception is much more narro! than F#" e%ception.

3. S(a(e/en( o decla%an(s PAST "h#sical o% /en(al condi(ion ad/issi0le (o"%o!e condi(ion4 i a( issue in (he case. Calio%nia onl#.

a. 4ncludes a state)ent of intention%

30


31/41

b. No re5uire)ent that state)ent *e )ade for )edical diagnosis or treat)ent%

c. Declarant )ust *e NAA4LABLE%

E8AMPLE$ +ac' :u)s out a window& and *efore he does so he says 84)

sic' of life and 4) going to 'ill )yself%9 4nsurance co)any wants to introducethis eidence to roe +ac' co))itted suicide and it was not an accidentaldeath%

FRE$ Ad)issi*le as declaration of then e7isting )ental or hysical condition%

CEC; Ad)issi*le as declaration of then e7isting )ental or hysical condition%

E8AMPLE$ +ac' falls out a window% "u*se5uently he goes to see a doctorand states& 8My shoulder was 'illing )e last wee' *ecause 4 fell out of the

window due to a faulty latch%9

FRE$ Ad)issi*le as declaration of ast or resent )ental or hysicalcondition )ade for )edical diagnosis or treat)ent%

CEC; 4nad)issi*le% $ant 5ualify as then e7isting hysical conditione7cetion& not discussing then e7isting condition% nder $E$& to 5ualify fore7cetion for ast )ental or hysical condition )ade for )edical diagnosis ortreat)ent& declarant )ust *e a child under ., years of age in the case of childa*use or neglect% #hat is not the case here% 4f +ac's condition was at issue inthe case AND +ac' were unaaila*le& the state)ent could *e ad)issi*leunder $E$ as state)ent of declarants ast hysical or )ental condition

ad)issi*le to roe condition *ut we hae no indication that +ac' isunaaila*le or whether the condition is at issue in this e7a)le%

E8AMPLE$ +ac' was tal'ing to his neigh*or and said 8Last wee' 4 was really*lue and sic' of life and wanted to 'ill )yself%9 +ac' later died falling out of a

window and insurance co)any wants to introduce this eidence to roe+ac' co))itted suicide and it was not an accidental death%

FRE$4NADM4""4BLE% "tate)ent of =A"# )ental or hysical condition& so itis not ad)issi*le as then e7isting state)ent e7cetion% "tate)ent not )ade

for )edical diagnosis or treat)ent& so not ad)issi*le under that e7cetion%CEC$Ad)issi*le as state)ent of declarants =A"# hysical or )entalcondition ad)issi*le to roe condition% #here is no re5uire)ent that thestate)ent *e )ade for )edical diagnosis or treat)ent and +ac' isunaaila*le and his )ental condition is at issue in the case%

B. usiness Reco%ds

31


32/41

1. nder *oth FRE and $E$& there are H re5uire)ents;

a. #he *usiness record )ust *e )ade in the regular course of *usiness (and not)ade solely in anticiation of litigation!%

b. 4t )ust *e )ade at or near the ti)e of )atters descri*ed& *y a erson with'nowledge of the facts in that record%

c. $ustodian testifies to the records identity and its )ode of rearation%

d. 4ndicia of trustworthiness in )ethod and ti)e of rearation of record%

2. No need to show declarant unaaila*le%

3. Re)e)*er that a*sence of records can *e used to show so)ething did nothaen%

4. FRE$ Oonent of eidence has *urden to roe *usiness record does not )eetre5uire)ents *y reonderance of eidence%

5. CEC$=roonent of eidence has *urden to roe *usiness record )eets allre5uire)ents *y a reonderance of eidence%

L. Pu0lic Reco%ds$"i)ilar foundation to *usiness records *ut do not need to *e )adeat or near ti)e of )atters descri*ed and not in regular course of *usiness& instead;

1. FRE$

a. Ad)issi*le if

(1) record descri*es the actiities or olicies of the office1

(2) record descri*es )atters o*sered ursuant to duty i)osed *y law(*ut not olice reorts in cri)inal cases!1 or

(3)record contains factual findings resulting fro) an inestigation )adeursuant to authority granted *y law& unless untrustworthy (not aaila*le in

cri)inal cases!%2. Oonent of eidence has *urden to roe *usiness record does not )eet

re5uire)ents *y reonderance of eidence%

3. CEC$

a. nli'e FRE& $E$ does not li)it the use of official reorts in cri)inal cases& sothere is no eclusion o %e"o%(s con(ainin, /a((e%s o0se%!ed 0# "oliceoice%s and o(he% law eno%ce/en( "e%sonnel.

b. =roonent of eidence has *urden to roe *usiness record )eets allre5uire)ents *y reonderance of eidence%

M. P%io% S(a(e/en( o Iden(iica(ion$

1. FRE andCEC$ Out of court state)ent *y a witness identifying the accused isad)issi*le if; (.! state)ent of identification was )ade after erceiing ersonAND (,! declarant testifies at trial and is su*:ect to cross-e7a)ination a*out thestate)ent%

32


33/41

NOTE$Loo' out for rior out-of-court identifications *y a witness who is NO#testifying at the current trial and therefore is not su*:ect to cross-e7a)ination%#his hearsay e7e)tion or e7cetion cannot aly if witness is not testifying attrial%

2. FRE$Nonhearsay

3. CEC$

a.


34/41

VII. PRIVILE9ES

A. P%eli/ina%# Ma((e%s

1. FRE$ No secific riilege roisions& co))on-law riileges%

2. CEC$4ncludes riilege roisions1 will not recogniIe secific riileges unlessauthoriIed *y statute%

a. =ro ? does NO# aly to )ost riilege law% Een in cri)inal cases& usualrules of eidence aly%

3. Di!e%si(# Cases in Fede%al Cou%($ "tate riilege law alies%

. A((o%ne#)Clien( P%i!ile,e$A co))unication *etween attorney and client or theirreresentaties intended *y client to *e confidential and )ade to facilitate renditionof rofessional legal serices is riileged unless waied *y the client%

1. Fed$

a. Attorney MAY clai) the riilege on *ehalf of the client%

b. =riilege suries death of client%

c. E7cetions;

(1) rofessional serices were sought to further cri)e or fraud1

(2) two or )ore arties consult an attorney on a )atter of co))on interestand the co))unication is offered *y one of these arties against another1

(3)co))unication relates to alleged *reach of duty *etween lawyer andclient%

2. CEC$

a. Attorney M"# clai) the riilege on *ehalf of the client%

b. =riilege ends once estate of dead client is distri*uted and e7ecutor of estateis discharged%

c. E7cetions;

(1) rofessional serices were sought to further cri)e or fraud1

(2) two or )ore arties consult an attorney on a )atter of co))on interestand the co))unication is offered *y one of these arties against another1

(3) co))unication relates to alleged *reach of duty *etween lawyer andclient%

(4) Addi(ional ece"(ion$=riilege does not aly where lawyer

reasona*ly *eliees disclosure of co))unication is necessary to reentcri)e that is li'ely to result in death or su*stantial *odily har)%

C. Doc(o%)Pa(ien( P%i!ile,e

34


35/41

1. Fed$No co))on-law riilege%

2. CEC$"tate)ents )ade *y a atient to a doctor for the urose of o*taining)edical treat)ent or diagnosis for hysical& )ental or e)otional condition areriileged%

a. =atient holds the riilege%

b. E7cetions- riilege does not aly where;

(1) =atient uts hysical or )ental condition at issue in case (e%g% ersonalin:ury!%

(2) Doctors serices were sought to aid in cri)e or fraud or to escaecature after a cri)e or tort%

(3) Lawsuit inoles doctor-atient relationshi (e%g% )alractice%!

(4) $ri)inal cases or where doctor is re5uired to reort infor)ation to au*lic office (e%g%& gun-shot wounds and so)e co))unica*le diseases!%

D. Ps#cho(he%a"is()Pa(ien( P%i!ile,e

1. Fed$$o))on-law sychotheraist-atient riilege%


2. CEC$"tate)ents )ade *y a atient to a doctor for the urose of o*taining)edical treat)ent or diagnosis for hysical& )ental or e)otional condition areriileged%


3.Ece"(ions$

a. Aly to BO#< federal law and $E$;

(1) =atient uts )ental condition at issue in case%

(2) =sychotheraists serices were sought to aid in cri)e or fraud or toescae cature after a cri)e or tort%

(3) Lawsuit inoles sychotheraist-atient relationshi (e%g%)alractice%!

(4) $o))it)ent roceedings%

(5) =atient is danger to self or others%

b.CEC Ece"(ion Onl#$

(1) Ta%aso Ece"(ion$ 4f sychotheraist has reasona*le cause to *elieethat the atient is a danger to hi)self or others& and that disclosure is

necessary to end thedanger% Esta*lishing a duty to warn%

35


36/41

E. S"ousal P%i!ile,es

1. S"ousal Tes(i/onial P%i!ile,e$

a. o(h ede%al and CEC$

(1)=er)its the witness souse to refuse to testify against his@her cu%%en(

souse% Must still *e )arried%(2)=rotects ALL co))unications& regardless of confidentiality& *oth during

and *efore )arriage1 includes *oth testi)ony and o*serations andi)ressions%

(3) itness souse is the holder of the riilege and can waie it if he@shewishes%

b. Fed$Alies ONLY in c%i/inalcases%

c. CEC$

(1) Alies in ciil AND cri)inal cases%

(2) itness souse is riileged not een to *e called to the stand%

2. S"ousal Coniden(ial Co//unica(ion P%i!ile,e$ Sa/e unde% ede%al andCEC) No dis(inc(ions.

a. #he riilege rotects coniden(ialco))unications )ade during (he/a%%ia,e4 e!en i (he cou"le is no lon,e% /a%%ied%

b. Does not aly;

(1) 4n a ciil action *etween the arties or

(2) 4n a cri)inal rosecution where one souse is charged with a cri)eagainst the other souse or one of their children%

c. Both souses are the holders of the riilege1 thus& neither souse can

unilaterally waie the riilege without the otherJs consent%

F. Cle%,#)Peni(en( P%i!ile,e$Both federal co))on law and $E$ recogniIe a riilegefor confidential co))unication )ade *y a enitent to a )e)*er of the clergy%

1. $lergy )ust custo)arily receie such co))unications in order to *e riileged%

2. Both enitent and clergy hold riilege%

9. O(he% CEC P%i!ile,es

1. ou%nalis() +Re"o%(e%s Shield Law-$ =roides i))unity fro) conte)t of courtfor news reorter who refuses to disclose sources.

a. E7cetion; Disclosure can *e co)elled if necessary to roide defendantright to a fair trial%

2. Seual Assaul( Counselo% H Vic(i/ P%i!ile,e$$onfidential co))unicationswith authoriIed se7ual assault counselor& case-wor'er& or counselor areriileged%

a. "i)ilar riilege for do)estic iolence cases%

b. =riilege not a*solute1 court can co)el disclosure where the ro*atie alue

36


37/41

of the state)ents outweighs the re:udicial effect%

VIII. WRITIN9S AND OTER TAN9ILE EVIDENCE

NOTE$ hen analyIing issues in this area& re)e)*er 8O=RA


38/41

b. CEC$ONLY ce%(iied co"ies o "u0lic %eco%ds such as ud,/en(s. Otherdocu)ents that are self-authenticating under FRE& )ust *e indeendentlyauthenticated under $E$%

. es( E!idence@Seconda%# E!idence Rule$Rule alies only where eidence isoffered to roe the contents of a writing (*roadly defined astangi*le rocess to

record words& ictures& and sounds -- includes recording& ideo& hoto&$D@DD@M=0%! #he rule re5uires roof of contents with original& *ut with )anye7cetions% "o the real 5uestion *eco)es; other than the original& what tangi*leeidence is ad)issi*le to roe contents of a writing& recording& ideo& hoto % % %

1. FRE$Dulicates ad)issi*le% A 8dulicate9 is a coy of an original roduced *ysa)e i)ression that roduced the original or *y a )achine (e%g%& hotocoier&ca)era& car*on coy!%


39/41

I8. APPROAC TO EVIDENCE ESSAYS

A. Fo%u/ and Case

1. $ourt; Are we in federal or state court Fact attern will let you 'now%

2. $ri)inal@ciil casea. Re/e/0e% i i( is a c%i/inal case in Calio%nia cou%( P%o" 3 co/es

in(o "la#

3.

. Iden(i# e!idence4 "a%(# (%#in, (o ,e( e!idence ad/i((ed4 whe(he% c%oss o%di%ec(.

1.$onsider O*:ections to the for) of 5uestions

a. Leading

b. Nonresonsie

c. $alls for a Narratied. Assu)es Facts Not in Eidence

e. $o)ound

f. "eculation

C. Ini(ial Anal#sis$ Is E!idence Rele!an(*

1. Lo,ical Rele!ance$ Eidence is releant if it has any tendency to )a'e thee7istence of any fact of conse5uence to the deter)ination of the action )ore orless ro*a*le than it would *e without the eidence%

a. Re)e)*er the distinction *etween FRE and $E$; nder $E$& needs to *e a

8disuted fact%92. Le,al Rele!ance$ 4s there any reason why releant eidence should

nonetheless *e e7cluded

a. Pu0lic "olic# eclusions

(1) Lia*ility insurance

(2) "u*se5uent re)edial )easures

(3) Offers to ay )edical e7enses

(4) "ettle)ent offers

(5) =lea negotiations

(6) Offers to ay )edical e7enses(7)CEC$E7ressions of sy)athy

b.alancin, o "%eudicial i/"ac( !s. "%o0a(i!e !alue ($E$ 0C,& FRE H0!

3. P%o" 3) CA C%i/inal Cases$ All releant eidence is ad)issi*le in a cri)inalcase& een if otherwise o*:ectiona*le under the $alifornia Eidence code& su*:ectto the following e7cetions;

a. $onfrontation clause (e7clusionary rule!

39


40/41

b.


41/41

a.M4M4$ rule

b."e7ual assault or child )olestation

c.CEC$Elder a*use or do)estic iolence

d.Mercy Rule

e.Oening the doorF. ea%sa# Rule (Grounds for e7cluding releant eidence!

1. Definition; (.! out of court state)ent (,! offered for the truth of the )atterasserted%

2. $onsider whether state)ent offered for another uroses; er*al acts& effect onlistener& i)each)ent%

3. Nonhearsay and hearsay e7cetions%

a. Ma'e sure you are clear on e7e)tions and e7cetions under FRE ande7cetions under $E$% For e7a)le& $E$ has a 8sontaneous state)ent9e7cetion and FRE has an 8e7cited utterance9 e7cetion% FRE has 8resent

sense i)ression9 e7cetion& $E$ does not *ut the state)ent )ight 5ualifyfor )ore narrow $E$ 8$onte)oraneous state)ent9 e7cetion%

b. Re)e)*er )ultile e7cetions )ay *e alica*le- discuss all of the) Fore7a)le& a state)ent )ay *e ad)issi*le as *oth a resent sense i)ressionand an e7cited utterance%

4.$onsider whether declarant needs to *e NAA4LABLE for hearsay e7cetion toaly%

9. P%i!ile,es(another ground for e7cluding releant eidence!

1. Attorney-client

2. =sychotheraist-atient3. "ousal #esti)onial =riilege

4. "ousal $onfidential $o))unication =riilege

5. $lergy-=enitent

6. CEC$Doctor-atient

7. CEC$Reorters "hield Law

8. CEC$ "e7ual Assault $ounselor-icti)

. Cou%(s Powe% To Eclude ?nde% The alancin, Ac( &FRE :;

California Bar Exam Lecture Notes - CA Evidence

Documents

Transcript of California Bar Exam Lecture Notes - CA Evidence