Chapter 4 Types of Evidence

“Circumstantial evidence is a very tricky thing. It may seem to point very straight to one thing, but if you shift your own point of view a little, you may find it pointing in an equally uncompromising manner to something

entirely different.” Sir Arthur Conon Doyle

Featured Case

•  In 2008 Casey Anthony was arrested for the murder of her 2 year old daughter.

•  Some evidence pointed toward her guilt; but all of it was circumstantial.

•  Witnesses for both sides gave contradictory and confusing testimony.

•  After 32 days of deliberation the jury returned a not guilty verdict.

•  How was the evidence utilized to reach this verdict? Was justice done?

•  The Anthony case was widely publicized. •  Many people felt there was strong evidence

to support her guilt. •  A jury however starts from the premise of

innocence. •  What fact or facts do you think most strongly

pointed to guilt? •  What fact or facts do you think the jury relied

upon to proclaim her innocence?

Applying the Law Trial by Media

Learning Objectives

•  Define and describe what is relevant and material evidence.

•  Define what is direct evidence and how it differs from circumstantial evidence.

•  Explain real evidence. •  Give examples of testimonial evidence. •  Define stipulations, judicial notice and

presumptions, explain how they are used at trial.

Relevant Evidence

•  Defined – Evidence that make any fact important to the case, more or less likely.

•  FRE 401

•  Relevant evidence is probative, it offers some proof a fact did or did not occur. – Probative value

Objections and Relevancy

•  Evidence that is not relevant is not admissible.

•  An attorney may object and require the judge to rule on the relevancy of any evidence.

•  If there is no objection, no proof of relevancy need be offered.

•  Isn’t it true that any information can only help make a decision?

•  Why then is some information kept from the trier of fact?

•  How can a judge not use evidence he has already heard, even if he ruled it irrelevant? – Can he simply ‘forget’ what he heard?

Applying the Law What is Relevant?

Material Evidence

•  Evidence that has some logical connection to the facts of the trial and effects whether they can be shown to be true or false.

•  Evidence that has no connection is immaterial, and inadmissible.

Exclusion of Relevant Evidence

•  Exclusion of Evidence is a balancing test.

•  Judges look at the impact of the evidence.

•  FRE 403 (Exclusion of Otherwise Relevant Evidence)

Typical Cases of Exclusion

•  Evidence that is unduly prejudicial due to high emotional impact.

•  Prior convictions of crimes not closely related in manner or time to the current case.

•  Evidence that distracts from the main issues at trial.

Cumulative v. Corroborative

•  Cumulative Evidence repeats other evidence or facts. – Less likely to be admitted

•  Corroborative Evidence adds new facts and confirms other evidence. – More likely to be admitted

Direct Evidence

•  Direct Evidence is evidence that conclusively establishes something as true – if it is believed by the jury.

•  Direct evidence of a fact in issue is always relevant.

Circumstantial Evidence

•  Is evidence that indirectly proves a fact.

•  It requires the jury or judge to make an inference or deduction.

•  It is not grounds to object to the admission of evidence simply by stating it is circumstantial.

Inference

•  Defined as a logical conclusion based on a fact or facts.

•  But other logical explanations are possible.

Testimonial Evidence

•  Defined as evidence given by a witness under oath or affirmation.

•  It can occur in court or before court, usually in a deposition. But to be testimonial each must be under oath.

•  Testimonial Evidence is critical.

Real Evidence

•  Defined – physical evidence that itself plays a direct part in the incident in question.

•  Including physical evidence, demonstrative evidence and tangible evidence.

•  Recently a number of men convicted of crimes have been released when DNA evidence seemed to contradict their conviction.

•  How much weight should testimonial versus real evidence be given?

•  Is real evidence somehow better? •  What practical standard should we use

here?

Applying the Law Real versus Testimonial Evidence

Substitutes for Evidence

•  Include – Stipulations – Judicial Notice – Presumptions

Stipulations

•  An agreement between the prosecution and defense to admit one or more facts into evidence.

•  Stipulations can be written or oral.

•  Typically they are made before trial, often to simplify or speed up the proceedings.

Judicial Notice

•  Defined – A procedure whereby the judge instructs the jury to conclude a fact exists.

•  FRE 201 (Defines Judicial Notice)

•  Often used for state laws or the content of court records.

Presumption

•  Defined – A legal inference or assumption that a fact exists based on the known or proven existence of some other fact or group of facts.

•  The ‘basic fact’ is what is necessary to establish a presumption may exist.

•  The ‘presumed fact’ is what may be assumed if the basic fact exists.

Figure 4-1 Conclusive, Strong Rebuttable, and Weak Rebuttable Presumptions

Francis v. Franklin

•  The defendant was on trial for capital murder.

•  As a prisoner he escaped custody and fled to a private residence.

•  The defendant shot through a closed door, killing the deceased when the victim refused to turn over his car.

•  At trial the defendant’s sole defense was that he did not intend to kill.

•  The judge’s instruction allowed the jury to presume the intent to kill.

•  The Supreme Court overturned the conviction, such presumptions can NOT be mandatory.

471 US 307 (1985)

•  Traditionally for a crime you had to have BOTH the physical act and the mental state of mind (mens rea).

•  However it seems were are moving towards a approach of strict liability.

•  Is the intent to commit an act worth keeping in the criminal law?

•  How much impact should intent have on charges, conviction or punishment?

Applying the Law Mens Rea

Limits on Presumptions

•  Three constitutional limits on Presumptions – A presumption must be based on a logical

assumption rather than mere policy – When used by the prosecution, the basic

fact must be established beyond a reasonable doubt

– A presumption cannot shift the burden of proof to the defendant

In re Winship •  During a juvenile hearing the State sought to convict a teenager under a lesser standard of proof.

•  The Supreme court rules that EVERY essential element of a crime must be proved.

•  A presumption of innocence is a foundation of American law.

397 US 358, (1970)

Types of Presumptions

•  Two general types of presumptions: – Rebuttable and Conclusive.

•  Rebuttable may also be divided into strong and weak.

•  For each you need still prove the ‘basic fact’ before the presumed fact may be considered.

•  The elements of crime rarely contain motive as a element, yet it seems critical in finding guilt.

•  Is it likely a person would commit a crime for no reason whatsoever?

•  Does this mean motive has to be proved in order to convict?

•  Does lack of motive mean someone is innocent, or does a strong motive prove guilt?

Applying the Law The Hidden Element