Logical Relevance Under the FRE, evidence is logically relevant if it has any tendency to make the existence of any

fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more to less probable than it would be without the evidence !he "E" requires that the fact of consequence be in dispute Legal Relevance # trial $udge has broad discretion to exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by its pre$udicial effect Evidence is pre$udicial if it may bias the $ury, confuse the $ury, waste time, or unduly delay the proceeding %earsay

%earsay is an out&of&court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted 't is generally inadmissible because the veracity of the witness at the time the statement was made cannot be tested %earsay Exceptions #lthough evidence may qualify as hearsay, there are certain exceptions to the hearsay rule for evidence that has its own indicia or reliability "haracter Evidence "haracter evidence is evidence that tends to suggest a party(s conduct occurred in conformity with their character 't can be offered by) *+, evidence of specific acts- *., opinion testimony of a witness who knows the person- or */, testimony as to the person(s general reputation in the

community 0b$ection) #ssumes Facts 1ot in Evidence # question may not assume as true, any fact not yet introduced into evidence 0b$ection) Lacks Foundation #n attorney cannot ask the witness to answer a question for which he or she lacks foundation 0b$ection) Logical Relevance Evidence must be logically relevant to be admissible Evidence is logically relevant when it tends to prove or disprove a material fact of the case 0b$ection) 2peculation # witness may not offer testimony based on

speculation or con$ecture 0b$ection) Lacks 3ersonal 4nowledge # witness may only testify to facts that are within his or her personal knowledge 0b$ection) "alls for a 1arrative # question that is so broad and general that it permits the witness to narrate is impermissible 3roper questions should be specific enough to allow the witness to answer only on specific sub$ects 0b$ection) %earsay %earsay is an out&of&court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted 't is generally inadmissible because the veracity of the witness at the time the statement was made cannot be tested

%earsay Exception) Excited Utterance #n excited utterance is a statement made by a witness as the witness is perceiving or experiencing an exciting event Excited utterances are admissible because the spontaneity and excitement of the statement leave little time for the witness to lie %earsay Exception) 3resent 2ense 'mpression # present sense impression is a statement made as the witness is making an observation or sensing something # present sense impression must be made contemporaneously with the event or sensation 5enerally the event is not exciting, or it would qualify as an excited utterance 0b$ection) 'mproper 0pinion !estimony

5enerally, opinion testimony be lay witnesses is inadmissible %owever, in situations where no better evidence can be obtained, lay opinions are permitted when they are) *+, rationally based on the witness( perception- *., helpful to a clear understanding of a witness( testimony or determination of a fact in issue- and */, not based on scientific or technical knowledge "ourts have held that lay witness can generally testify as to the speed of a vehicle, sanity, intoxication, emotion, and the value of the witness( property 1on&%earsay) 2tate of 6ind # person(s state of mind, emotion, or sensation is admissible as non&hearsay 6oreover, a person(s state of mind as to intent is also non&hearsay 7udicial 1otice

7udicial notice is the court(s recognition of a fact as true # court may take $udicial notice of either notorious or manifest facts 1otorious facts are those of common knowledge 6anifest facts are those easily capable of being verified through sources of unquestionable accuracy Exceptions to the "haracter Rule) 6odus 0perandi #n exception to the character rule exists when the evidence tends to suggest that the defendant has a modus operandi & namely a signature method for carrying out a particular act Use of a modus operandi makes a criminal more likely to be identified by his acts, which makes it a valid exception to the character rule %earsay Exception) 3ublic Records Under the public records exception, a

writing may be admitted into evidence if it was made by a public agency as) *+, part of that agencies activities- *., observations made by a public employee pursuant to a legal duty- or */, as part of an internal investigation 8est Evidence Rule Under the 8est Evidence Rule, an original document, or a duplicate original, must be produced if the terms of the writing are to be introduced into evidence #uthentication 'n order for a writing to be introduced into evidence, it must be authenticated&in other words, proven that the item is really what it purports to be %earsay Exception) 8usiness Records

Under the business records exception, a business record that contains hearsay will be admitted if it was prepared by someone during the normal course of business by someone with personal knowledge of and a duty to report the matter contained therein 'mpeachment 'mpeachment is the casting of an adverse reflection on the veracity of the witness 't can be done either by cross&exam or by putting other witnesses on the stand Reputation evidence for untruthfulness, which is otherwise inadmissible under the character evidence rule, is admissible to impeach a witness 3roposition 9 3roposition 9 is part of the "alifornia "onstitution Under proposition 9, all relevant evidence is admissible in "alifornia

criminal cases unless the evidence falls within an exemption %earsay Exemption) 3rior 2tatement of 'dentification # witness( prior statement identifying a person after perceiving him is non&hearsay under the FRE and is a hearsay exception under the "E" %owever, in order to protect the :(s rights, the declarant&witness must testify at trial and be sub$ect to cross& examination "haracter Evidence of the #ccused 0ffered by the #ccused Under the FRE, the accused may introduce reputation or opinion evidence of his good character to show his innocence of the alleged crime, but may not use specific instances of conduct

"haracter Evidence in a "ivil "ase "haracter evidence is generally 10! admissible in civil cases to show conduct in conformity therewith %owever, character evidence may be introduced in a civil case when character is at issue *defamation, child custody, fraud, or negligent entrustment,, or when establishing the :(s propensity for sexual assault or child molestation "haracter Evidence of the ;ictim 0ffered by the #ccused Under the FRE, the accused may introduce reputation or opinion evidence of the victim(s character, where the conduct of the victim in conformity with his character would tend to prove the innocence of the accused 2pecific acts may not be used to establish the victim(s character

!he "E" does allow specific instances of conduct to prove the victim(s character as evidence of how the victim acted on the occasion in question 'mpeaching with 3rior Felony # witness may be impeached, under the FRE and the "E", by any felony although, if the witness is the accused, the court must weight its probative value against its pre$udicial effect #lso, the conviction cannot be too remote in time