Evidence Outline

EVIDENCE OUTLINE
Benson
Fall 2011
I.        TRIAL PROCESS
A.       2 Types of Trials:
1.       Jury Trial – jury determines outcome
2.       Bench Trial – judge determines outcome
B.       Types of Evidence At Trial
1.       Real Evidence – generated by the case itself; ie: murder weapon, set of keys, etc.
2.       Demonstrative Evidence – used to illustrate & explain evidence in a case; ie: maps, photos, charts, experiments etc.
3.       Testimonial Evidence – witness testimony answering questions under oath
i.         4 Testimonial Capacities
a.       Witness’s Perception – interpretation of his/her own sensory data
b.       Witness’s Memory
c.        Logic & Clarity of Witness’s Story – how well do they communicate & how clear is the story?
d.       Witness’s Veracity to Tell the Truth – do they have any reason to lie?
4.       Direct Evidence – eyewitness testimony based on witness’s personal knowledge gained through senses; if true, it proves a fact w/ inferences & presumption
5.       Circumstantial Evidence – requires fact finder to make an inference to reach a factual conclusion in the case
C.      Evidence admitted at trial by “exhibits” – given a # or letter; 1 side gets one & the other side gets the other
D.      Judge’s Role
1.       Controls the trial process by setting limitations on lawyers in order to achieve justice & efficiency
2.       FRE’s give judges a great deal of power & discretion to run their courtrooms, rule on objections & motions, & set limits on lawyers, as long as power & discretion is exercised fairly
3.       Sources Of Judge’s Power Under FRE’s
i.         FRE 102 – PURPOSE & CONSTRUCTION
a.       Gives judge’s power to use FRE to “secure fairness” & “eliminate undue expense & delay”
b.       Gives them the power to set reasonable time limits on the various stages of trial
ii.        FRE 403 – EXCLUSION OF RELEVANT EVIDENCE ON GROUNDS OF PREJUDICE, CONFUSION, OR WASTE OF TIME
a.       Recognizes the power & duty of judge to use their discretion to exclude relevant evidence, that’s otherwise admissible, when its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of 1 or more of the following:
A)      Unfair Prejudice
B)      Confusion of Issues
C)      Misleading the Jury
D)      Undue Delay
E)      Waste of Time
F)      Cumulative Evidence
iii.      FRE 611 – MODE OF ORDER OF INTERROGATION & PRESENTATION
a.       Commands the court to “exercise reasonable control over mode & order of interrogating witnesses & presenting evidence” for 3 reasons:
A)      Make the interrogation & presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth
B)      Avoid needless consumption of time
C)      Protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment
iv.      FRE 614 – CALLING & INTERROGATION OF WITNESSES BY THE COURT
a.       Gives judges the right to call & question witnesses to clear up confusion or manage trials whenever necessary, BUT can’t ask questions that signal their belief
E.       Order of Events For Trial
1.       Preliminary matters
i.         Pre-Trial Conference – required by federal procedural rules to narrow the factual & legal issues & identify witnesses & documents that will be offered into evidence
ii.        Pre-Trial Motions – may be made to attempt to control admissibility of evidence
2.       Voir Dire – jury selection
3.       Opening Statements
i.         Plaintiff/Prosecutor goes first
ii.        D goes 2nd, but can wait until they present their case-in-chief
4.       P’s Case-In-Chief & Direct Examination; D’s Cross
5.       Possible – D’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law
i.         Requests judge to conclude that no rational jury could find P’s evidence satisfies the applicable standard of proof
6.       D’s Case-In-Chief & Direct Examination; P’s Cross
7.       P’s Rebuttal Witnesses
8.       D’s Rebuttal
9.       P’s 1st Closing
10.    D’s Closing
11.    P’s 2nd Closing – optional
12.    Jury instructions
13.    Deliberations
14.    Appeal – optional
 
II.      RELEVANCE
A.       The Threshold question of admissibility of ALL evidence
B.       Whether evidence is “relevant” is always the starting point & threshold question that must always be asked 1st before considering anything else!!
C.      ALWAYS TRUMPS HEARSAY!!!!
D.      3 Rules to Determine Whether Evidence is Relevant:
1.       FRE 401 – DEFINITION
i.         Evidence having any tendency to make any fact of consequence more or less probative that w/o the evidence
ii.        2 Concepts:
a.       “Fact Of Consequence To Determination Of The Action” – does this fact relate to an element of the case?
A)      This turns on the requirements of the underlying substantive law
B)      Could be elements of a claim, defenses & facts relating to the credibility of the testimony
b.       “Any Tendency” refers to “Logical Relevance” – this evidence must be probative based on common experience & knowledge; it makes it likely; its more or less probable w/o the evidence
A)      Any increase or decrease in probability of a fact or consequence will suffice, no matter how small
B)      ASK:  Does it seem like a jury ought to know about it for whatever its worth?
iii.      Probative Value – does evidence itself have to prov