RELEVANCE

401 Definition of Relevance

Relevant evidence means evidence having any
tendency to make the existence of any fact of
consequence to determination of the action
more or less probable then w/out the evidence
403 Exclusion of Relevant Evidence
Evidence must be excluded if its probative value
is substantially outweighed by the evidences
Danger of unfair prejudice
onfusion of issues
!isleading the jury
"ndue delay / waste of time
#resentation of cumulative evidence
$rule is favor of admissibility
%ill a &imiting 'nstruction work(
)re there )lternate means of proof available
104 Preliminar !uestions
*a+ Court must decide on preliminary questions
about whether a witness is qualified, a privilege
exists, or evidence is admissible- 'n so deciding,
court is not bound by evidence rules except
those on privilege-
*b+ Relevance "#at De$ends on a %act& %hen
the relevance of evidence depends on whether a
fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient
to support a finding that the fact does exist- .he
court may admit the proposed evidence on the
condition that the proof be introduced later-
*a+ cuts the 'ur out, *b+ cuts the 'ud(e out
)ud(e cannot rule *ased on credi*ilit+
$urel for 'ur decide if a ,itness is credi*le
10- Limited Admissi*ilit
%hen evidence is admissible for a single party
or purpose and it is admitted, the court, upon
request shall instruct the jury to limit
consideration of the evidence only to its proper
scope
o .ou #ave to re/uest t#is
RELEVAN"0 12" 3NAD435531LE
406 5u*se/uent Remedial 4easures 7$ure $olic
rule8
%hen measures are taken that would have made
an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur,
evidence of the subsequent measures is not
admissible to prove negligence, culpable
conduct, defect in product or design, or a need
for warning or instruction
!easures taken before the accident are
admissible / only protecting measures taken
post0accident
)dmissible for impeachment suc# as *not
exclusive+*if disputed+ proving ownership,
control, or feasibility of precautionary measures,
subject to a 123 evaluation
409 Com$romise : ;ffers to Com$romise
Evidence of the following is not admissible *for
either party+ to prove / disprove the validity or
amount of a dis$uted claim *must be a dis$ute+
or to impeach by a prior inconsistent statement
or a contradiction4
718 5urnishing, promising, or offering6or
accepting, promising to accept, or offering to
accept6a valuable consideration in
compromising or attempting to compromise the
claim
7<8 onduct or a statement made during
compromise negotiations about the claim6
except when offered in a criminal case and when
the negotiations related to a claim by a public
office in the exercise of its regulatory,
investigative, or enforcement authority
Exce$tions& .he court may admit this evidence
for another purpose, suc# as proving a witnesss
bias or prejudice, negating a contention of undue
delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal
investigation or prosecution-
7hields evidence about settlements or offered
settlements and evidence about conduct or
statements and admissions made in
com$romise ne(otiations
!ust be in course of settlement negotiations, if
they do not know they are in negotiations then it
is not protected
Does not bar evidence that is otherwise
obtainable through discovery, even if idea to
pursue it is spawned in settlement
annot immuni8e information from trial merely
by bringing it up in settlement
)dmissible for other purposes subject to 123
7tatements are admissible to prove bias9 witness
already settled and now testifies for D-
40= > ;ffer of Pament 4edical Ex$enses
Evidence of furnishing, promising to pay, or
offering to pay medical, hospital, or similar
expenses resulting from an injury is not
admissible to prove liability for the injury-
'ncludes transportation to hospital
#rotection of 12: does not extend to actions or
statements not directly involved in the
furnishing of medical care or expenses
)dmissible for other issues subject to 123
410> 3nadmissi*ilit of Pleas : Related Discourse
)ll statements made in plea bargaining sessions
or related to plea bargaining made to
PR;5EC2";R5 ;NL. will not be
admissible
;olo contendere 6 like a guilty plea but cant
be used against the person in a civil suit
Rule of ompleteness <2= / if another part of
the statement is admissible and to understand it,
it is necessary to admit this part then it will be
admitted
)dmissible for prosecutions concerning perjury
>reaking a plea deal renders it all admissible
411 Lia*ilit 3nsurance
Evidence that party was or was not covered by
liability insurance is not admissible to prove
whether the person acted negligently or
otherwise wrongfully
)dmissible for ownership *why insure it if you
dont own it(+, agency, control, or proving
witness bias or prejudice
)pplies only to liability9 no other insurance
!oss says that even raising liability insurance in
a trial will result in an immediate mistrial
C?ARAC"ER : CRED313L3".
4047A8 C#aracter @enerall
haracter is not admissible to prove action in
conformity therewith 6 ;? #R?#E;7'.@
"7E
4047a8718 C#aracter of Accused
Does not apply in civil cases
Can offer evidence of a pertinent trait of
character, but NOT admissible to prove
conformity therewith
?nce the door is open the prosecution may
introduce evidence to rebut that trait of character
4047a87<8 C#aracter of Alle(ed Victim
Does not apply to civil cases
Reputation or Opinion evidence concerning a
pertinent trait of character of the victim
Prosecution may respond to rebut the same
once door is opened or introduce evidence of D
having same trait of character, end of !a"! #"
'n homicide case D claim victim is <
st
aggressor,
prosecution may introduce evidence of
peacefulness of victim or against D
4047a8738 C#aracter of Aitness
)vailable in ivil A riminal trials
)ddressed in =2B, =2C, =2:
4047*8 ;t#er Crimes or Acts
Not admissible to prove criminal disposition or
propensity
)dmissible to prove *not exclusive+4 !otive,
malice, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan,
knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, guilty
state of mind-
Requires notice be given of general nature of
extrinsic acts sought to be introduced pre0trial
criminal trials only
$ust establish reasonable belief the acts
actually occurred prior to introduction%
7tatute of limitations is not a bar to introduction
40- 4et#ods of Provin( C#aracter
?nly if character evidence is admissible under
121 do you apply 12D
40-7a8 Re$utation or ;$inion
Reputation or Opinion testimony will always be
admissible if allowed to come in under &'&%
40-7*8 5$ecific 3nstances of Conduct
?nly admissible when character trait is an
essential element of the claim or defense
)lso allowed under cross e(amination in a
limited way 6 =2B, =2C
)llows the admission of extrinsic proof
40B ?a*itC Routine Practice
Evidence of habit or routine practice will be
admissible to prove conformity therewith
)llowed to establish by reputation/opinion or
specific instances sufficient to establish conduct
Eudge must be persuaded that the conduct in
question is virtually automatic and has been
repeated many times in the past
Regular Response to 7pecific 7ituation
)dvisory Committee notes indicate the
drun*enness and fighting are not acceptable
under &'+ as habit
41< Ra$e 5#ield La,s 7"exas version of 41<
a$$lies onl to civil cases8
Character evidence concerning the victims
se(ual disposition is never admissible , trumps
&'&!a"
haracter evidence usually allows no specific
instances, but 1<F exceptions only allows
specific instances
riminal cases haracter evidence proved
under 12D*b+ is admissible to prove 4
) person other than the accused was the
source of physical evidence *she had sex
with someone else prior+
.o prove specific instances of sexual
behavior between D and victim to establish
consent *she and D had sex a lot
consensually+
Civil Cases / 7exual predisposition never
admissible9 other evidence admissible as above
if the probative value substantially outweighs
danger of harm to victim or unfair prejudice to
any party9 Evidence of alleged victim-s
reputation admissible only if placed in
controversy by the victim *G'm not that kind of
girlH+*Reverse 403 *alancin(87favors
exclusion over admission8 %3NAL dou*le>
c#ecD on exam ,#at test #e $uts in
413 Evidence of 5imilar Crimes 5exual Assault
)dmissible *even in prosecutors case in chief+
#rosecution must disclose its intent to use the
conviction <D days before trial or on good cause
414 Evidence of 5imilar Crimes C#ild
4olestation
)dmissible *even in prosecutors case in chief+
#rosecution must disclose its intent to use the
conviction <D days before trial or on good cause
41- Civil Cases Concernin( C#ild 4olestation or
5exual A*use
ivil case with claim for damages predicated on
the alleged act Evidence of prior similar
crimes ) dmissible
34PEAC?4EN"
B06 A#o 4a 3m$eac#
redibility of the witness may be attacked by
any party, including the party who called the
witness
!ay not call a witness solely to impeach, if your
purpose is to proffer otherwise inadmissible
evidence-
B097a8 C#aracter : Conduct of Aitness
Re$utation and ;$inion
Evidence of witnesses character for truth A
veracity only
Evidence of truthful character is admissible only
after character for truthfulness has been attacked
B097*8 C#aracter : Conduct of Aitness
5$ecific 3nstances of Conduct
Probative .pecific /nstances concerning the
witness- truthfulness or veracity can be probed
on cross0e(amination no e(trinsic evidence
is permitted1 must stic* with witness- answer
!ay also question a GcharacterH witness on
cross0examination with specific instance of
conduct concerning the testifying witness
character for truth and veracity
EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE IS
PERMITTED N CRSS T PRVE!
"I#S$ INTEREST$ PRE%&DICE$ R
CRR&PTIN
B0= 3m$eac#ment * Evidence of Conviction
=2: *a+ / =2:*a+*<+ 5elony or =2:*a+*F+ any
crime involving dishonest or false statement
=2:*a+*<+*>+ is REVER5E 403 1ALANC3N@
Evidence of felony conviction not related to
truth or dishonesty are subject to 123
)ccused probative value outweighing
prejudicial effect )pplies to defendant
?ther %itness9 prejudice substantially
outweighs probative value
+'2!3" , not admissible if #' years since the
conviction or release from confinement
could be allowed if probative value
substantially outweighs prejudicial effect
*REVER5E 403+
>ut more then <2 years old only admissible
if proponent gives adverse party advance
notice
=2:*b+ does not apply to =2:*a+*F+ crimes
B13 Prior 5tatement of Aitnesses
!ay question witness concerning prior
statement inconsistent w/ testimony, and
$ro$onent does not need to disclose to t#e
,itness
EE"R3N53C EV3DENCE ;%
3NC;N535"EN" PR3;R 5"A"E4EN"
A3LL ;NL. 1E AD435531LE 3%
A3"NE55 35 A%%;RDED AN
;PP;R"2N3". "; EEPLA3N ;R DEN.
"?E 5"A"E4EN"
.he admissibility is 12</123 question for
determination by the court there is not set rule
ollateral extrinsic evidence is only permitted
on cross0examination
#rior onsistent 7tatements are admissible
when inferences of improper motive or perjury
have been suggested-
3m$eac#ment * Contradiction
ollateral Extrinsic Evidence is not permitted-
Extrinsic Evidence of contradiction will only be
admissible is it relevant to the trial regardless of
its impeachment use-
'mpeachment by ontradiction can be done
with ollateral Evidence subject to limitations
of =2C-
EEPER" EV3DENCE
601 ;$inion "estimon * La Aitness
?pinions must be rationally based, helpful to
clear understanding, not based on knowledge
w/in scope of B2F-
ompetency rules apply
60< "estimon * Ex$erts
)ssist the trier of fact to understand the
evidence or to determine a fact in issue%
Experts can have scientific, technical, or other
speciali8ed knowledge
Expert by4 knowledge, skill experience,
education, training, or otherwise
'f *<+ the testimony is based upon sufficient
facts and data, *F+ the testimony is the product
of reliable principles and !ethods, and *3+ the
witness has applied the principles and methods
reliably to the facts of the case
)nything admissible under B2F has to go
through Daubert, but relaxed application for
non0scientific experts
Daubert 5actors4
.heory been tested
#eer review
Error rate know A applied
Degree of acceptance
.rial court has wide discretion to determine who
is an expert and when testimony is admissible
603 1ases of ;$inion "estimon * Ex$erts
.he facts or data relied upon by expert in
formulating his opinion do not need to be
admissible in evidence if they are of the type
reasonably relied on by e(perts in that field
when forming opinions
'nadmissible facts or data used to form an
opinion should only be revealed to the jury if the
court decides t#e $ro*ative value in assistin(
t#e 'ur to evaluate t#e ex$ert su*stantiall
out,ei(#s t#eir $re'udicial effect + reverse
403
'f judge determines that the information relied
upon by the expert is incorrect, he may exclude
the evidence even if the type reasonably relied
upon- 't would not assist the trier of fact under
B2F-
604 ;$inion on 2ltimate 3ssue
E(perts may testify to an opinion concerning an
ultimate issue in the case e(cept in one
circumstance
Experts may not testify to the mental state or
condition of a I in a criminal case with an
opinion on the ultimate issue
60- Disclosure of %acts 2nderlin( ;$inion
Experts can proffer their opinion and inferences
w/out revealing the underlying data or facts,
however they may be questioned on cross0
examination
A3"NE55 C;4PE"ENC.
103 Rulin(s on Evidence
Error for )ppeal must effect a substantial right
of the effected party-
Requires a timely objection on specific grounds
o ?r objection is waived
104 Preliminar !uestions
Eudge makes all determinations concerning the
admissibility of evidence and legal questions
concerning objections and rules of evidence
Eury decides conditional relevancy points
B01 @eneral Rule of Com$etenc
Every person is competent to be a witness
except as otherwise provided
'nsanity at time of event or trial
hildren w/out sufficient intellectual capacity to
relate transaction / ability to understand events
and vulnerability to adult suggestion / 12</123
argument
.estators oral statements not allowed, unless
corroborated or called by adverse party
B0< LacD of Personal Fno,led(e
!ay not testify to a matter unless evidence is
introduced sufficient to support that the witness
has personal knowledge-
%itness must have perceived something
relevant to the case at hand-
an be proved by witness own statements
Does not address how witness obtained
knowledge-
B03 ;at# or Affirmation
B10 Reli(ious 1eliefs or ;$inions
;ot admissible for purposes of showing that by
virtue of religion they are more or less
reliable/credible
B0- )ud(e Cannot *e Aitness
B0B )uror Cannot *e Aitness
Except testifying to outside influences on the
jury-
B06 see 3m$eac#ment
B09 G
B11 4ode : ;rder of 3nterro(ation
losed end, narrative questions allowed all the
time
)rgumentative A &eading questions allowed
only on cross0examination and hostile witnesses
or adverse parties
7cope of ross0examination is limited to the
subject matter of direct examination and matter
effecting the credibility of the witness =2C*b+
B1< Aritin( used to Refres# 4emor
)fter viewing writing the witness memory gap
disappears / the writing does not need to be
admissible b/c testimony is evidence not writing
an inquire about writing on cross and
introduce portions if desired- *adverse party+
EE?313"5 : A2"?EN"3CA"3;N
=01 Re/uirement of Aut#entication
Jenerally / requires authentication or
identification as a condition precedent to
admissibility is evidences sufficient to support
that the evidence is what it purports to be-
:2<*b+*<+ .estimony of %itness w/ Knowledge
:2<*b+*F+ ;on0Expert ?pinion on Landwriting
/ based on familiarity not acquired for litigation
:2<*b+*3+ omparison by .rier of 5 or Expert %
/ comparing handwritten to authenticated pieces
of writing
:2<*b+*1+ Distinctive haracteristics / only one
who knew, medallion fitting together
:2<*b+*D+ Moice 'dentification / can testify that
mechanical recording is voice of party, cannot
base voice identification on the voice 'Ding
himself
:2<*b+*=+ .elephone onversations / by bill
with registered number from phone company
:2<*b+*C+ )ncient documents / F2 years
:2<*b+*:+ #rocess or system / computer
generated documents
.he judge determines whether there is some
evidence from which the jury could reasonably
find that the item is what it is claimed to be-
.he jury decides if the evidence is actually what
is claims to be
=0< 5elf Aut#entication
;o extrinsic proof of authenticity required for
admission
Domestic public Records under 7eal
Domestic public records not under seal
5oreign #ublic Documents
ertified opies of #ublic Records
?fficial #ublications
;ewspapers A #eriodicals
.rade 'nscriptions
)cknowledged Documents
ommercial #aper A Related Documents
=03 5u*scri*in( Aitness "estimon 2nnecessar
.estimony of a subscribing witness is
unnecessary to authenticate a writing unless
required by the laws of jurisdiction whose laws
govern the validity of the writing
100< Re/uirement of ;ri(inal
.o prove the content of a writing, recording, or
photograph, the original is required
'f witness has knowledge about the reality and
does not depend on the document, record, photo
for her testimony 7he is testifying to
personal knowledge and the original is not of
consequence-
'f a party seeks to introduce testimony
specifically about what an item shows or says
then the original must be produced or somehow
authenticated w/in the rules
1001 Definitions
<22<*3+ ?riginal / the actual writing recording
or photo- #hoto original negatives and any print
there from- )ll computer printouts are originals-
ounterparts are originals
<22<*1+ Duplicates / counterpart produced by
same impression
>est evidence rule applies whenever writing,
record, or photo is necessary to or is used to
prove an element of the case, if only incidental
the best evidence rule does not apply- *<221+
1003 Admissi*ilit of Du$licate
)dmissibility of Duplicates / a duplicate is
admissible to same extent as the original, unless
a genuine question as to authenticity of original
has been raised- )nd unfair to not require the
original
1004 Admissi*ilit of ;t#er Evidence of Content
?riginal is not required and other evidence of
the content is admissible if4
?riginals lost or destroyed , but not in bad faith
?riginals are not obtainable through the judicial
process or procedure
?riginals are in possession of opponent who had
notice and failed to produce them
ollateral !atters / the writing is closely
related to a controlling issue
100B 5ummaries
ontents of voluminous writings, photos,
recordings may be summari8ed for the court
12RDEN5 ;% PR;;% 5?;R"C2"5
"; PR;;%
301 Presum$tions
#resumption require the party against whom it is
directed the burden to produce some evidence to
rebut or meet the presumption, but does not shift
any burden of persuasion or proof9 which
remains throughout the trial on whom it was
originally cast
<01 )udicial Notice of Ad'udicative %acts
?nly cover )djudicative *rule upon judicially+
facts4 those which normally go to the jury-
5acts not subject to reasonable dispute4
generally known territorially or capable of
accurate and ready determination by resort to
sources whose accuracy cannot be questioned
) court can take notice4 by request or its own
action
) party is entitled to a timely hearing to
question the taking of notice on a disputed fact
Eury will take as undisputed in civil cases, not
required to do so in criminal cases-
?EAR5A. 1A53C R2LE
"estimonial 3nfirmities
#erception
!emory
7incerity
;arration/clarity
9017c8 ?earsa
Learsay is a statement, other than one made
while the declarant is testifying at trial or
hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of
the matter asserted
C2<*a+ 7tatement / an oral or written assertion
or non0verbal conduct of a person intended by
the person as an assertion
nothing is an assertion, unless intended to
be one
'f statement is introduced for a reason other than
to prove the truth of the matter asserted, no
hearsay issue
;o hearsay issue / if statement introduced to
prove notice or awareness
'ndependent &egal 7ignificance/&egally
?perative onduct / ;o Learsay #roblem
G' accept your offerH in ontract ase
G' doH at a wedding
)ssertions of Jifts
7tate of !ind 0 the fact the statement is made is
not to prove its truth but to show the state of
mind- ;ot offered to prove external reality
;? Learsay )ctions spea* louder than words%
3m$eac#ment not #earsa
Effect on hearer
!achine Exception / machine not declarants so
photos, readouts, videotapes9 are not hearsay
9017d8 5"A"4EN" N;" ?EAR5A.
9017d8718 Prior 5tatement * Aitness
Aitness must *e on t#e stand and su*'ect to
cross>examination
#rior 'nconsistent 7tatement
!ade out of court
#rior to testifying
onflicts w/ testimony
#rior 'nconsistent 7tatements made under oath
are admissible as proof of what it asserts
Consistent testimon to rebut accusations of
fabrication or improper motive are admissible as
long as the statement sought to be introduced
was made before the witness would have motive
to falsify his testimony 6 not hearsay so can be
admitted for truth
C2<*d+*<+*+ 3dentifications out of court
are admissi*le
9017d87<8 Admission * Part ;$$onent
!ust proffered against the party who made the
statement-
)n exception to the general rule that witness
must testify from personal knowledge *via
adoption, belief+-
C2<*d+*F+*)+ / personal admission / is party
said it, its in- )dmission by silence requires4
*<+ party heard and understood the statement9
*F+ party was able to reply9 *3+ a reasonable
person would have responded-
C2<*d+*F+*>+ / adoptive admission / manifestly
adopted or asserted belief in its truth- 7ilence is
adoptive admission
C2<*d+*F+*+ / )uthori8ed admission / made by
a party aut#oriHed *context matters a lot+ to
represent the party
C2<*d+*F+*D+ / Micarious )dmission / a
statement by the partys agent or employee
relevant to agency or employment A while in
the scope of agency or employment
C2<*d+*F+*E+ / oconspirator / during course
and in furtherance of the conspiracy statements
are excluded from the Learsay Rule
903 ?EAR5A. EECEP"3;N5&
DECLARAN"I5 AVA3LA13L3".
344A"ER3AL
903718 Present 5ense 3m$ression
) statement describing or e(plaining an event
or condition made while declarant was
perceiving the event or immediately after
7tatement must be contemporaneous w/ event
AA"C? ;2" %;R PA5" "EN5E
5"A"E4EN"5
!ust be made by one who perceived the event
!ust describe or explain only this event
an be an opinion of what declarant perceived
9037<8 Excited 2tterance
7tatement relating to a startling event or
condition while the declarant was under the
stress of excitement caused by the event
!ust be startling event
an be used to corroborate the event actually
happening
!ust still be under stress from event, or later
GtriggeredH
!ore liberal relation to event / does not have to
be specifically related to startling event
903738 "#en>Existin( 4ental0 Emotional0 or
P#sical Condition
7tatement of existing state of mind, but not
statement of memory or belief to prove fact
remembered not backwards looking *even
part of the sentenceNcertain parts can be ?K
and others notpage 3<<, problem =+
G' am going to NH statements A then did go
there
7tate of mind is not hearsay / not offered to
prove external reality doesnt go past C2<*c+
7tatements of intent to do something or go
somewhere *'illmon+ of declarant onl
*Pheaster+
5orward looking statements ?K
>ackward are not allowed
903748 5tatements for 4edical
Dia(nosisJ"reatment
5or treatment or medical history, past or present
symptoms, pain, sensations, general character
and cause of above reasonably pertinent to
diagnosis 4 treatment
;ot necessary to expect treatment6diagnosis
alone works
7tatement to any person who may reasonably
provide treatment or diagnosis
Does not have to be made by injured person,
could be made for them
9037-8 Recorded Recollection
!ust be made at the time of the event by the
witness when the memory was fresh
Record or memorandum concerning a matter of
which the witness once had knowledge but now
has insufficient recollection to testify9 if the
record was made by or adopted by the witness
when the matter was fresh in his mind it may be
read into the record-
an be exhibit only if offered by an adverse
party
9037B8 Records of Re(ularl Conducted Activit
>usiness or not purely personal
Records kept as regularly conduct activity
Regular practice
!ade at or near the time of event
>y or from custodian of the records or other
qualified witness
%ohnson v( )*t+ 6 each person in the
report chain must have had a duty to make a
report or must fall under hearsay exception
o 5o a $olice re$ort ,it#
ee,itness statements + eac#
,itnesses statement must fall
under #earsa exem$tion
903768 A*sence of Entr in Re(ularl Fe$t
Records
C23*=+ / absence of entry can be used to prove
its non0occurrence
903798 Pu*lic Records or Re$orts
)ctivities of #ublic ?ffice/internal
)dmissible by all parties in both civil A
criminal
!atters observed pursuant to a legal duty by
;?;0&aw enforcement personnel
)dmissible by all in both criminal A civil
5indings 5rom ?fficial investigations
)dmissible in all civil cases, and onl
admissi*le for D in criminal cases
!atters ?bserved A Reported pursuant to legal
duty / &aw Enforcement #ersonnel
admissible in civil but not admissi*le in
criminal casesK
904 ?EAR5A. EECEP"3;N5 7rule
does not a$$l8& DECLARAN"
425" 1E 2NAVA3LA1LE
9047a8 2navaila*ilit
C21*a+*<+ / privilege
C21*a+*F+ / contempt / witness available but
chooses not to come
C21*a+*3+ / &ack of !emory / cannot remember
despite refresh / recorded recollection fits here
C21*a+*1+ / death or physical infirmity
C21*a+*D+ / if a party offer evidence of under
F,3,1 the party must first attempt to procure
testimony through other methods9
>est effort standard for C21*a+*D+
OC21*b+*<+ raises onfrontation lause problemsP
9047*8718 %ormer "estimon
.estimony at a prior hearing
#arty against whom the testimony is offered had
an opportunity and similar motive to develop
testimony and cross0examine
;o grand jury 6 no opportunity for cross
%itness should be under0oath
)naly8e each issue and party
!otive / party had adequate reason in earlier
action to examine the witness thoroughly
?pportunity 0 had right to examine,
examination did not have to occur00 only right
matters
9047*87<8 Din( Declarations
7tatement made under belief of impending death
&imited to the cause or circumstances of what
declarant believed to be impending death
Declarant does not actually have to die
9047*8738 5tatement A(ainst 3nterest
7tatement contrary to the declarants pecuniary,
proprietary, or penal interest or that so far
tended to subject the declarant to civil or
criminal liability or renders a claim invalid
against another
Reasonable person in declarants position would
not have made this unless it was true
7tatements made to exculpate another of
liability will not be admissible w/out
corroboration to indicate trustworthiness
'ntroduced by any party
)gainst any party
9047*8748 5tatement of Personal or %amil
?istor
)llowed regardless of personal knowledge
9047*87B8 %orfeiture * Aron(doin(
) statement offered against a party that has
engaged in wrongdoing that was intended to,
and did, procure the unavailability of the
declarant as witness
5orfeit your right to object on hearsay grounds if
wrongdoing to procure unavailability of
declarant
90B AttacDin( : 5u$$ortin( Credi*ilit of
Declarant
'mpeach witness as if he were the declarant
'f party against whom the hearsay statement is
admitted calls the declarant they may examine
as if it is cross examination-
906 Residual Exce$tion
RELA"3;NAL PRV3LE@E5
?251ANDJA3%E
riminal trial defendant has right to keep spouse
from testifying
#rivilege to keep spouse from disclosing
confidential marital communications
&ost if made before 3
rd
parties
Eavesdropper could testify
A"";RNE.JCLE3N"
onfidentiality of communications if made in
the context of client lawyer relationship
o Rendition of legal services
3
rd
party presence may destroy confidentiality
Except disputes b/w clients, attorneys,
lient waives privilege by testifying
%ork product
PA"3EN"P?.53C3AN 7P5.C?;"?ERAPI"8
;o health information can be disclosed
Does not apply to malpractice cases nor
preparation for litigation
3
rd
party destroys confidentiality and privilege
can be waived by testifying to conversations
5EL%>3NCR34NA"3N@ "E5"34;N.
D
th
amendment / criminal defendant may refuse
to testify, witness may refuse specific questions
only-
#rotects an individual from being compelled to
give incriminating testimony, such as their
thoughts, recollections, intentions or actions-
Eury cannot draw inferences from defendants
silence-
C;442N3CA"3;N5 "; CLER@.4EN
;nl $erson can ,aive $rivile(e
All confidential communication ,it# cler(0
a$$l even if not a*out reli(ion