1) Introduction
a) FRE §102
i) These rules shall be construed to secure fairness in administration, elimination of unjustifiable expense and delay, and promotion of growth and development of the law of evidence to the end that the truth may be ascertained and proceedings justly determined.
b) FRE §103
i) (a) Error may not be predicated upon a ruling which admits or excludes evidence unless a substantial right of the party is affected, and
(1) In case the ruling is one admitting evidence, a timely objection or motion to strike appears of record, stating the specific ground of objection, if the specific ground was not apparent from context or
(2) In case the ruling is one excluding evidence, the substance of the evidence was made known to the court by offer or was apparent from the context within which questions were asked.
ii) (b) The court may add any other or further statement which shows the character of the evidence, the form in which it was offered, the objection made, and the ruling thereon. It may direct the making of an offer in question and answer form.
iii) (c) In jury cases, proceeding shall be conducted, to the extent practicable, so as to prevent inadmissible evidence from being suggested to the jury by any means, such as making statements or offers of proof or asking questions in the hearing of the jury.
iv) (d) Nothing in this rule precludes taking notice of plain errors affecting substantial rights although they were not brought to the attention of the court.
c) CEC §140
i) Evidence means testimony, writings, material objects, or other things presented to the senses that are offered to prove the existence or non-existence of a fact.
d) CEC §190
i) Proof is the establishment by evidence of a requisite degree of belief concerning a fact in the mind of the trier of fact or the court.
e) CEC §410
i) As used in this chapter, “direct evidence” means evidence that directly proves a fact, without an inference or presumption, and which in itself, if true, conclusively establishes that fact.
f) CEC §411
i) Except where additional evidence is required by statute, the direct evidence of one witness who is entittled to full credit is sufficient for proof of any fact.
g) Class Notes 08-19-03
2) Relevance
a) Bare Relevance
i) FRE §401 (The “Bare Relevance” Standard)
(1) Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency (probative value) to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence (material) to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
ii) FRE §402
(1) All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided by the Constitution of the United States, by Act of Congress, by these rules, or by other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.
iii) FRE §403
(1) Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.
iv) CA Proposition 8, 1982. Amended the State Constitution to bar e
ding the jury outweighs the probative value of the evidence sought to be admitted. Exclusions still stand, even if relevant.
(f) CA Evidence Codes Section 782 and 1103
(i) CA Rape Shield not affected, exclusions still stand even if relevant.
(g) Existing statutory or constitutional rights of the press
(i) Confidential sources, unpublished info obtained gathering the news.
v) CEC §210
(1) Relevant evidence means evidence, including evidence relevant to the credibility of a witness or hearsay declarant, having any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action.
vi) CEC §350
(1) No evidence is admissible except relevant evidence
vii) CEC §351
(1) Except as otherwise provided by statute, all relevant evidence is admissible.
b) Probative Effect:
i) Tendency to make the existence of a fact more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence
ii) United States v. James (1999) p.25
Violent boyfriend had reputation for beating people. Had beaten the mother. Altercation ensues, mother gives daughter a handgun as requested, to defend herself and fend off the attacker, daughter shoots attacker. Both assert self defense, police records documenting his past acts were barred as irrelevant, as
