Impeachment by attack on character for truthfulness. 608(a) opinion and reputation evidence 608(b) specific acts -- prior convictions
|
|
- Horace Parsons
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Impeachment by attack on character for truthfulness 608(a) opinion and reputation evidence 608(b) specific acts prior convictions 1
2 Question. Rule 608(b) codifies the Oswalt rule prohibiting use of extrinsic evidence to impeach by contradiction on a collateral matter. 1. True 2. False 0% 0% True False 2
3 Rule 608. Evidence of Character and Conduct of Witness (restyled) (a) Reputation or Opinion Evidence. A witness s credibility may be attacked or supported by testimony about the witness s reputation for having a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the form of an opinion about that character. But evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the witness s character for truthfulness has been attacked. 3
4 Rule 608. Evidence of Character and Conduct of Witness (restyled) (a) Reputation or Opinion Evidence. A witness s credibility may be attacked or supported by testimony about the witness s reputation for having a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the form of an opinion about that character. But evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the witness s character for truthfulness has been attacked. 4
5 Rule 608. Evidence of Character and Conduct of Witness (restyled) (a) Reputation or Opinion Evidence. A witness s credibility may be attacked or supported by testimony about the witness s reputation for having a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the form of an opinion about that character. But evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the witness s character for truthfulness has been attacked. 5
6 Reference: Rule 608(a). Hypo. An informant testifies for the prosecution that he bought drugs from the defendant. There is no crossexamination. The next witness is a police officer who testifies that the informant is extremely truthful and reliable. Objection! 1. Admissible 2. Inadmissible 0% 0% Admissible Inadmissible 6
7 Same case, except that the defendant cross-examines the informant, eliciting a concession that the informant is cooperating with the prosecution in hopes of obtaining leniency in a pending charge. Does this form of impeachment allow the prosecution to respond by putting in opinion testimony that the informant is extremely truthful? 1. Yes 2. No 0% 0% Yes No 7
8 Same case, except that on cross-examination, the defendant elicits evidence that the informant was previously convicted of fraud. Does this form of impeachment allow the prosecution to respond by putting in opinion testimony that the informant is extremely truthful? 1. Yes 2. No 0% 0% Yes No 8
9 Same case. After defendant attacks the informant s character for truthfulness, the prosecution calls a federal agent who testifies that the informant is extremely trustworthy. He supports this opinion by testifying that he has worked with the informant on 10 other drug cases in which the informant reported buying drugs from a suspect and the suspect later confessed, confirming the informant s report. 1. Admissible 2. Inadmissible 3. Admissible in part. 0% 0% 0% Admissible Inadmissible Admissible i... 9
10 HIDDEN SLIDE Hypo. Plaintiff sues defendant for employment discrimination. After plaintiff has testified, defendant calls a witness who testifies that, as CFO of the corporation, the witness worked side by side with plaintiff for 10 years and has examined the plaintiff s expense accounts, and that in his opinion the plaintiff has an extremely bad character for truthfulness. Objection! 1. Admissible 2. Inadmissible 3. Partly admissible and partly inadmissible 0% 0% 0% Admissible Inadmissible Partly admissi... 10
11 The following testimony by Y is offered to impeach witness X: Q. Do you know Mr. X? A. Yes. Q. How do you know him? A. I supervised him for ten years at Allied Products. Q. What is your position with Allied Products? A. I am the CFO. Q. Who reviews the expense accounts at Allied Products? A. I do. Q. Have you reviewed Mr. X's expense accounts? A. Yes. Q. Do you have an opinion about Mr. X's character for truthfulness? A. Yes. Q. What is that opinion? A. He is extremely untruthful. Is this testimony admissible? 1. Admissible 2. Inadmissible 3. Admissible in part. 0% 0% 0% dmissible dmissible sible in... 11
12 United States v. Owens, p. 501 United States Court of Military Appeals, 1985 Owens criminal history: Conviction possession of marijuana Conviction carrying pistol Arrest assault on second wife. 12
13 Consider the evidence about Owens conviction for carrying a pistol. Assume the crime was a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of 6 months. Owens could be questioned about it under Rule Rule 608(b). 3. Both of the above. 0% 0% 0% Rule 609 Rule 608(b). Both of the a... 13
14 The court indicated that the trial judge erred in allowing questioning about the following incident: 1. the conviction for carrying a pistol 2. the arrest for attack on his second wife 3. the conviction for possession of marijuana 4. None of the above. Had the trial judge erred, the appellate court would not have affirmed the conviction. the conviction for ca... 0% 0% 0% 0% the arrest for attack.. the conviction for p... None of the above
15 Question 1, p.510 (cross-examination about false claim to have Master s degree). Permissible? 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 0% 0% 0% Yes No It depends 15
16 Question 1, p.510 (cross-examination about false claim to have Master s degree). Permissible under California law? (See CEC 787, p ) 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 0% 0% 0% Yes No It depends 16
17 Q-2, p. 510 (refreshing memory about prior falsehood). Permissible? 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 0% 0% 0% Yes No It depends 17
18 Q-3, p First part: Introducing evidence of a disciplinary committee report finding the witness committed plagiarism. Permissible? 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 0% 0% 0% Yes No It depends 18
19 Q-3, p Second part: Introducing evidence of disciplinary committee report finding the witness committed plagiarism, after the witness admits that it is authentic. Permissible? 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 0% 0% 0% Yes No It depends 19
20 Q-5, p. 511 Would it be permissible to ask on cross-examination, Isn t it true that you were expelled from graduate school for plagiarism? 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 56% 41% 4% Yes No It depends 20
21 United States v. Drake, p. 511 United States Court of Appeals, 10 th Circuit, 1991 Drake was accused of fraud committed by concealing a third party s security interest in collateral. On direct, he claimed ignorance of security interests, saying he was a psychology major, not a business major. On cross, he testified that he had a degree in psychology. He was impeached with questions such as: Q. Also, isn t it a fact that you were actually kicked out of the University of Illinois in 1951? A. No. * * * Q. [I]f the transcript and record from the University of Illinois indicates that you were dismissed from the university at the close of the second semester 1950 to 1951 for violation of terms of your probation and for falsification of facts in a disciplinary investigation, is it your testimony this document is not correct? 21
22 After the foregoing testimony, would it have been permissible to call the records custodian of the University of Illinois to prove by the business records of the University that Mr. Drake was expelled before getting his degree? 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 71% 19% 10% 0% Yes No It depends 22
23 Suppose that the prosecutor in Drake had started out her cross-examination by asking: Is this document I have in my hand, the record of the University of Illinois saying you were expelled from school, is this an accurate record? Would this question have been permissible? 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 42% 33% 25% Yes No It depends 23
24 The Drake court said that Though the questions asked did not constitute extrinsic evidence, they were arguably improper because they assumed facts not in evidence. p But the court added that for a variety of reasons (including failure to make a timely objection) this possible impropriety was not reversible error. My problem with the sentence quoted above: The objection assumes a fact not in evidence is basically the same as the objection that the lawyer is testifying. And if the lawyer is testifying, isn t that testimony extrinsic evidence? 24
25 Hypo. Your opponent puts in an out-of-court statement that is admissible under an exception to the hearsay rule. You have extrinsic evidence that the hearsay declarant was convicted of fraud. Is your evidence admissible? (See Rules 609(a)(2) and 806). 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 76% 24% 0% Yes No It depends 25
26 HIDDEN SLIDE Hypo. In a civil case, W testifies for P in an automobile accident case. On cross-examination, W is asked whether she falsely claimed a fictional person as a dependent on her most recent tax return. The alleged misconduct did not result in conviction and has nothing to do with the auto accident case. In the discretion of the trial judge, the question is Reference: CEC sec. 787, p Permissible in federal court, but not in California state court 2. Permissible in California, but not in federal court 3. Permissible in either. 4. Not permissible in either Permissible in federa... 0% 0% 0% 0% Permissible in Califor... Permissible in either. Not permissible in ei... 26
27 The end 27
28 HIDDEN SLIDE. THE SAADA CASE WAS NOT ASSIGNED IN Hypo. On cross-examination of a witness, is it permissible to impeach the witness by asking him whether the lied on a job application? 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 0% 0% 0% Yes No It depends 28
29 HIDDEN SLIDEHypo. Your opponent puts in an out-of-court statement under a hearsay exception. You have extrinsic evidence that the declarant lied on a job application (no conviction resulted). Under Saada, is your evidence admissible? 1. Yes 2. No 3. It depends 0% 0% 0% Yes No It depends 29
30 NOTE: THE SAADA CASE WAS NOT ASSIGNED IN FALL, 2009 United States v. Saada, p. 478 United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 2000 Held, extrinsic evidence of the untruthful conduct of a hearsay declarant is not admissible, even if the declarant is not available for questioning. Rule 806 does not modify the ban on extrinsic evidence set forth in Rule 608(b). 30
31 HIDDEN SLIDE Hypo. Your opponent puts in an out-ofcourt statement under a hearsay exception. Would you be permitted to ask the witness sponsoring the statement about dishonest conduct by the out-of declarant? Reference: p Yes 2. No 3. It depends 0% 0% 0% Yes No It depends 31
32 Hypo.. In a civil case, W testifies for P in an automobile accident case. On cross-examination, W is asked whether she falsely claimed a fictional person as a dependent on her most recent tax return. The alleged misconduct did not result in conviction and has nothing to do with the auto accident case. In the discretion of the trial judge, the question is Reference: CEC sec. 787, p Permissible in federal court, but not in California state court 2. Permissible in California, but not in federal court 3. Permissible in either. 4. Not permissible in either Permissible i... 0% 0% 0% 0% Permissible i... Permissible... Not permissi... 32
33 HIDDEN SLIDE Hypo. In a civil case, W testifies for P in an automobile accident case. On cross-examination, W is asked whether she falsely claimed a fictional person as a dependent on her most recent tax return. The alleged misconduct did not result in conviction and has nothing to do with the auto accident case. In the discretion of the trial judge, the question is References: CEC sec. 787, p. 1227; Art. 1, sec. 28, p Permissible in federal court, but not in California state court 2. Permissible in California, but not in federal court. 3. Permissible in either. 4. Not permitted in either. 100% swer text... 33
34 The end 34
Methods of impeachment. Contradiction Inconsistent statement Bad character for truthfulness Bias Lack of capacity or opportunity to observe
Methods of impeachment Contradiction Inconsistent statement Bad character for truthfulness Bias Lack of capacity or opportunity to observe 1 Oswalt rule: Extrinsic evidence is not admissible to impeach
More informationWitness testimony The question and answer method (Jack Ruby essay, p. 485) 1. Free narratives are usually not permitted.
Witness testimony The question and answer method (Jack Ruby essay, p. 485) 1. Free narratives are usually not permitted. 2. Leading questions are usually not permitted on direct examination. 1 Why not
More informationImpeachment with prior convictions This is an opinion poll about what the law should be, not what it is.
Impeachment with prior convictions This is an opinion poll about what the law should be, not what it is. In general, it would be good policy to allow the prosecution to impeach the testimony a person accused
More informationCharacter or Impeachment? PRESENTED BY JUDGE KATE HUFFMAN
Character or Impeachment? PRESENTED BY JUDGE KATE HUFFMAN Evid. R. 401 Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination
More informationWhat s Your Theory of Admissibility: Character Evidence, Habit, and Prior Conduct
John Rubin UNC School of Government April 2010 What s Your Theory of Admissibility: Character Evidence, Habit, and Prior Conduct Issues Theories Character directly in issue Character as circumstantial
More informationSIMULATED MBE ANALYSIS: EVIDENCE PROFESSOR ROBERT PUSHAW PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW
SIMULATED MBE ANALYSIS: EVIDENCE PROFESSOR ROBERT PUSHAW PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW Editor's Note 1: This handout contains a detailed answer explanation for each Evidence question that appeared
More informationNew Jersey Rules of Evidence Article VI - Witnesses
New Jersey Rules of Evidence Article VI - Witnesses N.J.R.E 601. General Rule of Competency Every person is competent to be a witness unless (a) the judge finds that the proposed witness is incapable of
More informationCROSS EXAMINATION AND IMPEACHMENT AS PRACTICE TOOLS. Traci A. Owens
CROSS EXAMINATION AND IMPEACHMENT AS PRACTICE TOOLS Traci A. Owens Using Prosecution Witnesses to tell Our Clients STORIES The defense often suffers from a witness shortage. THE PROSECUTOR S FRAILTY IS
More informationSIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE
SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...3 TEXAS CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Title 1, Chapter 38...3 TEXAS RULES OF EVIDENCE Article I: General Provisions...4 Article IV: Relevancy
More informationCHARACTER EVIDENCE PROBLEMS 1
CHARACTER EVIDENCE PROBLEMS 1 Problem 1 Defendant is charged w/ S&D/PWISD Cocaine. State calls Witness Shady Hood to testify about previous instances in which defendant bought, sold, and used drugs. State
More informationFed. R. Evid. 804(b)(3) The statement against interest exception.
Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(3) The statement against interest exception. 1 The declarations against interest exception is sometimes confused with the exemption for admissions. (Note: Under the restyled rules,
More information2016 FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version)
2016 FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) In American trials, complex rules are used to govern the admission of proof (i.e., oral or physical evidence). These rules are designed to ensure that
More informationFEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version)
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) (ADOPTED 9/4/2012) INDEX ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Rule 101 Scope... 1 Rule 102 Purpose and Construction... 1 ARTICLE II. JUDICIAL NOTICE... 1 Rule 201
More informationDELAWARE HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL RULES OF EVIDENCE
DELAWARE HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL RULES OF EVIDENCE In American trials, complex rules are used to govern the admission of proof (i.e., oral or physical evidence). These rules are designed to ensure that
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED June 16, 2015 v No. 318473 Bay Circuit Court MARK JAMES ELDRIDGE, LC No. 12-011030-FH Defendant-Appellant.
More informationFULL OUTLINE. Bar Exam Doctor BAREXAMDOCTOR.COM. EVIDENCE
FULL OUTLINE www.barexamdoctor.com EVIDENCE I. RELEVANCE a. Definition i. Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the
More informationWhy? Test Specific Knowledge Course Coverage Test Critical Reading Objective Grading
Why? Test Specific Knowledge Course Coverage Test Critical Reading Objective Grading Part of a Continuum MBE Essay PT Memorize law Critical reading Identify relevant facts Marshal facts Communication skills
More informationTRIAL OBJECTIONS. Considerations Effect on the jury Scrutinous Judiciously Effective/Disruptive
TRIAL OBJECTIONS Albert E. Durkin, Esq. Miroballi Durkin & Rudin LLC Considerations Effect on the jury Scrutinous Judiciously Effective/Disruptive Will the answer hurt your case? Protecting the record
More informationRULES OF EVIDENCE Pennsylvania Mock Trial Version 2003
Article I. General Provisions 101. Scope 102. Purpose and Construction RULES OF EVIDENCE Pennsylvania Mock Trial Version 2003 Article IV. Relevancy and its Limits 401. Definition of "Relevant Evidence"
More informationImpeachment in Louisiana State Courts:
Impeachment in Louisiana State Courts: La. Code of Evidence Recognizes Eight Ways By Bobby M. Harges 252 To impeach or attack the credibility of a witness in Louisiana state courts, a party may examine
More informationFEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) (updated 10/07)
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) (updated 10/07) In American trials complex rules are used to govern the admission of proof (i.e., oral or physical evidence). These rules are designed to
More informationServing the Law Enforcement Community and the Citizens of Washington
WASHINGTON ASSOCIATION OF SHERIFFS & POLICE CHIEFS 3060 Willamette Drive NE Lacey, WA 98516 ~ Phone: (360) 486-2380 ~ Fax: (360) 486-2381 ~ Website: www.waspc.org Serving the Law Enforcement Community
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT CLARK COUNTY : : : : : : : : : :... O P I N I O N
[Cite as State v. Ali, 2015-Ohio-1472.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT CLARK COUNTY STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee v. OMAR ALI Defendant-Appellant C.A. CASE NO. 2014 CA 59
More informationFEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2019
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2019 Effective July 1, 1975, as amended to Dec. 1, 2018 The goal of this 2019 edition of the Federal Rules of Evidence 1 is to provide the practitioner with a convenient copy
More informationImpeachment in Administrative Cases
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary Volume 6 Issue 2 Article 1 10-15-1986 Impeachment in Administrative Cases Calvin William Sharpe Follow this and additional works at:
More informationOklahoma High School Mock Trial Program RULES OF EVIDENCE ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS. Rule 101. Scope
Oklahoma High School Mock Trial Program RULES OF EVIDENCE ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Rule 101. Scope These Simplified Federal Rules of Evidence (Mock Trial Version) govern the trial proceedings of the
More informationRules of Evidence (Abridged)
Rules of Evidence (Abridged) Article IV: Relevancy and its Limits Rule 401. Test for Relevant Evidence Evidence is relevant if: (a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT. STATE OF OHIO : : Plaintiff-Appellee : JOURNAL ENTRY : -VS- : AND : MICHAEL WILLIAMSON : OPINION
[Cite as State v. Williamson, 2002-Ohio-6503.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 80982 STATE OF OHIO : : Plaintiff-Appellee : JOURNAL ENTRY : -VS- : AND : MICHAEL WILLIAMSON
More informationEMPIRION EVIDENCE ORDINANCE
EMPIRION EVIDENCE ORDINANCE Recognized Objections I. Authority RULE OBJECTION PAGE 001/002 Outside the Scope of the Ordinance 3 II. Rules of Form RULE OBJECTION PAGE RULE OBJECTION PAGE 003 Leading 3 004
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA DURWIN ABBOTT VERSUS CAPTAIN PERCY BABIN, ET AL. CIVIL ACTION NO. 12-631-JJB-SCR RULING ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE This matter is before the court on
More informationEVIDENCE. Professor Franks. Final Examination, Fall 2013 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
EVIDENCE Professor Franks Final Examination, Fall 2013 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1. Carefully analyze the facts and grasp the issues in each question before beginning to write. Spend time reading the question
More informationPrior Statements in Montana: Part I
The Alexander Blewett III School of Law The Scholarly Forum @ Montana Law Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings Faculty Publications 2013 Prior Statements in Montana: Part I Cynthia Ford Alexander
More informationThe scope of the Alabama Rules of Evidence is stated in Rule 101: So it makes some sense to go straight to Rule 1101, even though it is
ALABAMA RULES OF EVIDENCE BACK TO THE BASICS The scope of the Alabama Rules of Evidence is stated in Rule 101: Rule 101. Scope. These rules govern proceedings in the courts of the State of Alabama to the
More informationFederal Rules Of Evidence (2012)
of 27 2/26/2012 10:34 AM Published on Federal Evidence Review (http://federalevidence.com) Federal Rules Of Evidence (2012) The Federal Rules of Evidence Page provides the current version of the Federal
More informationRECORDING OF EVIDENCE.
1 RECORDING OF EVIDENCE. The primary questions are cropup in the mind of audience would be what evidence mean and who has to record such evidence and what is the purpose of recording of evidence. The term
More informationUSALSA Report U.S. Army Legal Services Agency. Trial Judiciary Note. Claiming Privilege Against Self-Incrimination During Cross-Examination
USALSA Report U.S. Army Legal Services Agency Trial Judiciary Note Claiming Privilege Against Self-Incrimination During Cross-Examination Lieutenant Colonel Fansu Ku * Introduction At a general court-martial
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC04-21 LOWER CASE NO.: 2D REPLY BRIEF OF PETITIONER S BRIEF ON THE MERITS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA RAYMOND BAUGH, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / CASE NO.: SC04-21 LOWER CASE NO.: 2D02-2758 REPLY BRIEF OF PETITIONER S BRIEF ON THE MERITS On Discretionary
More informationTEXAS RULES OF EVIDENCE Effective June 14, Title, Scope, and Applicability of the Rules; Definitions
TEXAS RULES OF EVIDENCE Effective June 14, 2016 ARTICLE I. Rule 101. Rule 102. Rule 103. Rule 104. Rule 105. Rule 106. Rule 107. ARTICLE II. Rule 201. Rule 202. Rule 203. Rule 204. ARTICLE III. Rule 301.
More informationDomestic. Violence. In the State of Florida. Beware. Know Your Rights Get a Lawyer. Ruth Ann Hepler, Esq. & Michael P. Sullivan, Esq.
Domestic Violence In the State of Florida Beware Know Your Rights Get a Lawyer Ruth Ann Hepler, Esq. & Michael P. Sullivan, Esq. Introduction You ve been charged with domestic battery. The judge is threatening
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral
More informationMULTI CHOICE QUESTIONS EVI301-A
MULTI CHOICE QUESTIONS EVI301-A 2010 Second Semester Assignment 1 Question 1 If the current South African law does not provide a solution to an evidentiary problem, our courts will first of all search
More informationEVIDENCE CALIFORNIA DISTINCTIONS Bar Exam Outline
EVIDENCE CALIFORNIA DISTINCTIONS Bar Exam Outline Law applying to both FRE & CEC is in black Law applying to FRE only is in blue Law applying to CEC only is in red WHEN TO APPLY CALIFORNIA LAW - only on
More informationv. CASE NO. 1D Michael Ufferman of the Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D10-6695
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED January 2, 2014 v No. 310937 St. Clair Circuit Court TAMARA SUE FROH, LC No. 12-000112-FH Defendant-Appellant.
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DARRYL C. NOYE Appellant No. 1014 MDA 2014 Appeal from the Judgment
More information2011 RULES OF EVIDENCE
2011 RULES OF EVIDENCE Pennsylvania Mock Trial Version Article I. General Provisions 101. Scope 102. Purpose and Construction Article IV. Relevancy and its Limits 401. Definition of "Relevant Evidence"
More informationEVIDENCE MBE PRACTICE QUESTIONS
EVIDENCE MBE PRACTICE QUESTIONS Evidence Questions 1. Evidence Questions Question 1 A plaintiff brought an action against a defendant for property damages, alleging that the defendant s car nicked the
More informationArticle IX DISCIPLINE By-Law and Manual of Procedure
NOTICE 10-01-13 The following By-Laws, Manual and forms became effective August 28, 2013, and are to be used in all Disciplinary cases until further notice. Article IX DISCIPLINE By-Law and Manual of Procedure
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2015-0010, State of New Hampshire v. William DeGroot, the court on September 21, 2018, issued the following order: The defendant, William DeGroot, appeals
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT March 28, 2008 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff - Appellee, RAOUL
More informationNCTA Disciplinary Procedure
NCTA Disciplinary Procedure The Nebraska College of Technical Agriculture (NCTA) Disciplinary Procedure is adapted for NCTA from Article IV: Student Code of Conduct Disciplinary Procedures of the UNL Student
More informationFEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2018
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2018 Effective July 1, 1975, as amended to Dec. 1, 2017 The goal of this 2018 edition of the Federal Rules of Evidence 1 is to provide the practitioner with a convenient copy
More informationCROSS AND TAPPER ON EVIDENCE
CROSS AND TAPPER ON EVIDENCE Twelfth edition COLIN TAPPER, MA, BCL Emeritus Professor of Law, University of Oxford OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS CONTENTS Preface to the 12th edition v Extractfrom the preface
More information6.17. Impeachment by Instances of Misconduct
6.17. Impeachment by Instances of Misconduct (1) Subject to paragraph (c), (a) the credibility of a witness may be impeached on cross-examination by asking the witness about prior specific criminal, vicious,
More informationKing County Prosecuting Attorney's Office Brady Committee Protocol
DANIEL T. SATTERBERG PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Office of the Prosecuting Attorney CRIMINAL DIVISION W554 Courthouse 516 Third Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296-9000 Prosecuting Attorney's Office Brady
More informationCOURSE OUTLINE AND ASSIGNMENTS
EVIDENCE: COURSE OUTLINE AND ASSIGNMENTS Topic 1: Introduction to the Law of Evidence Read: Text pages 1 9 Rules 101, 102, 1101 A. Addressing Societal Conflicts/Disputes 1. Name various ways we address
More informationIndex. Adjudicative Facts Judicial notice, Administrative Rules Judicial notice,
Index References in this index from 900 to 911 are to sections of the Wisconsin Rules of Evidence, and references from 1 to 33 are to chapters of this book. A Adjudicative Facts Judicial notice, 902.01
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PASCO COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PASCO COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, CASE NO. 2011-CA-3117-ES-J4 PLAINTIFF, v. ERIC WALL, DEFENDANT. / DEFENDANT
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 16, 2008 v No. 278796 Oakland Circuit Court RUEMONDO JUAN GOOSBY, LC No. 2006-211558-FC Defendant-Appellant.
More informationRules Pertaining to Witnesses
University of Michigan Law School University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository Book Chapters Faculty Scholarship 1978 Rules Pertaining to Witnesses John W. Reed University of Michigan Law School,
More informationPRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS AND SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE
PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS AND SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE FEDERAL RULE 801(D)(1)(A): THE COMPROMISE Stephen A. Saltzburg* INTRODUCTION Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(A) is a compromise. The Supreme Court
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED February 10, 2011 V No. 295650 Kalamazoo Circuit Court ALVIN KEITH DAVIS, LC No. 2009-000323-FH Defendant-Appellant.
More information2010 PA Super 230 : :
2010 PA Super 230 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee v. JOHN RUGGIANO, JR., Appellant IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA No. 1991 EDA 2009 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of June 10, 2009 In
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 4, 2004
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 4, 2004 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. WILLIAM J. PARKER, JR. Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Warren County No. M-7661
More informationNo. 1D On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County. Don H. Lester, Judge. August 30, 2018
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA No. 1D16-1828 ROBERT ROY MACOMBER, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County. Don H. Lester, Judge. August
More informationSIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE
SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE In trials in the United States, elaborate rules are used to regulate the admission of proof (i.e., oral or physical evidence). These rules are designed to ensure
More informationInvestigations and Enforcement
Investigations and Enforcement Los Angeles Administrative Code Sections 24.21 24.29 Last Revised August 14, 2017 Prepared by City Ethics Commission CEC Los Angeles 200 North Spring Street, 24 th Floor
More information) Cause No. 1:14-cv-937-WTL-DML. motions are fully briefed and the Court, being duly advised, resolves them as set forth below.
SCHEIDLER v. STATE OF INDIANA Doc. 88 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION BRENDA LEAR SCHEIDLER, Plaintiff, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Defendant. Cause No. 1:14-cv-937-WTL-DML
More informationEvidence for Delaware Criminal Defense
Evidence for Delaware Criminal Defense Impeachment The Story: Murder Trial Witness: At 11 p.m. I saw defendant, 150 feet away, hit the victim over the head. At prior codefendant s trial: I could see because
More informationacquittal: Judgment that a criminal defendant has not been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
GlosaryofLegalTerms acquittal: Judgment that a criminal defendant has not been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. affidavit: A written statement of facts confirmed by the oath of the party making
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON January 20, 2004 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON January 20, 2004 Session BRENDA J. SNEED v. THOMAS G. STOVALL, M.D., ET AL. Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. 57955 T.D. Karen R.
More informationA. What is Civil Procedure? Civil procedure is about the rules that govern the exercise of state power through civil lawsuits.
OVERVIEW I. Introduction to Civil Procedure A. What is Civil Procedure? Civil procedure is about the rules that govern the exercise of state power through civil lawsuits. B. The 2007 Rewriting of the Federal
More informationCOMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : No. CR : v. : : CRIMINAL DIVISION ROGER MITCHELL RIERA, : Petitioner : OPINION AND ORDER
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LYCOMING COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : No. CR-1459-2011 : v. : : CRIMINAL DIVISION ROGER MITCHELL RIERA, : Petitioner : OPINION AND ORDER After a jury
More informationChapter XV TRIBAL ELDER AND ADULT PROTECTION CODE. Indian Community "Tribal Elder and Adult protection Code".
Chapter XV TRIBAL ELDER AND ADULT PROTECTION CODE 1500. Be it enacted by the Bay Mills Indian Community assembled: 1501.!~ ThiS Code shall be known and cited as the Bay Mills Indian Community "Tribal Elder
More informationCharacter and Prior Conduct. What is Character? 8/2/2010. John Rubin School of Government April Who can put character in issue?
Character and Prior Conduct John Rubin School of Government April 2010 What is Character? Character comprises the actual qualities and characteristics of an individual Is extrinsic evidence admissible?
More informationCOLORADO COURT OF APPEALS
COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2016COA165 Court of Appeals No. 14CA1987 City and County of Denver District Court No. 13CV32470 Honorable Morris B. Hoffman, Judge Trina McGill, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DIA Airport
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 529 U. S. (2000) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
More informationdeath penalty. In prosecuting the case, State v. Michael Anderson, Mr. Alford and Mr.
I. Description of Misconduct In August 2009, Orleans Parish Assistant District Attorneys Kevin Guillory and John Alford conducted a trial on behalf of the State of Louisiana. The defendant faced the death
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED March 24, 2009 v No. 282098 Oakland Circuit Court JOHN ALLEN MIHELCICH, LC No. 2007-213588-FC Defendant-Appellant.
More informationIn the Magistrate Court of Kanawha County West Virginia
In the Magistrate Court of Kanawha County West Virginia Magistrate Court Case No. 13 M 3079-81 Circuit Court Appeal No. State of West Virginia - PLAINTIFF Police Officers Vernon and Yost Kanawha County
More informationI N T H E COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res
More informationJudicial Branch. Why this is important What do I do if I m arrested? What are my rights? What happens in court?
Judicial Branch Why this is important What do I do if I m arrested? What are my rights? What happens in court? What could happen if I am found guilty? What do I do if I think my rights are being violated?
More informationEFFECTIVE CROSS-EXAMINATION TIPS LAWRENCE J. WHITNEY, ATTORNEY AT LAW
EFFECTIVE CROSS-EXAMINATION TIPS LAWRENCE J. WHITNEY, ATTORNEY AT LAW I. GENERAL REMARKS A. Accountability (Advocate) 1. Just you 2. No one else is there for client - never do or say anything that goes
More informationCase 1:17-cr KBF Document 819 Filed 06/11/18 Page ORDERED. 1 of 8 GUIDELINES REGARDING APPROPRIATE USE OF 302 FORMS IN CRIMINAL TRIALS
Case 1:17-cr-00350-KBF Document 819 Filed 06/11/18 Page ORDERED. 1 of 8 Post to docket. GUIDELINES REGARDING APPROPRIATE USE OF 302 FORMS IN CRIMINAL TRIALS 6/11/18 Hon. Katherine B. Forrest I. INTRODUCTION
More informationAppellate Division, Third Department, People v. Young
Touro Law Review Volume 19 Number 2 New York State Constitutional Decisions: 2002 Compilation Article 6 April 2015 Appellate Division, Third Department, People v. Young Randy S. Pearlman Follow this and
More informationCommonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: AUGUST 3, 2012; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2011-CA-000373-MR DEREK R. TRUMBO APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE AUDRA
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR CLARK COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. Case Nos CA-101 And 2002-CA-102
[Cite as State v. Kemper, 2004-Ohio-6055.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR CLARK COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO : Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. Case Nos. 2002-CA-101 And 2002-CA-102 v. : T.C. Case Nos. 01-CR-495 And
More informationLegal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules under the. Legal Profession Uniform Law
Legal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules 2015 under the Legal Profession Uniform Law The Legal Services Council has made the following rules under the Legal Profession Uniform Law on 26 May
More informationCase 1:05-cr RBW Document 271 Filed 02/07/2007 Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:05-cr-00394-RBW Document 271 Filed 02/07/2007 Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) CR. NO. 05-394 (RBW) v. ) ) I. LEWIS LIBBY, )
More informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Evidence/Remedies And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question Green s Grocery Outlet
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS DOMINIC J. RIGGIO, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED November 26, 2013 v Nos. 308587, 308588 & 310508 Macomb Circuit Court SHARON RIGGIO, LC Nos. 2007-005787-DO & 2009-000698-DO
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI GEORGE LEE BUTLER APPELLANT v. NO. 200S-KA-0883-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT MISSISSIPPI OFFICE OF I~APPEALS Erin E. Pridgen,
More informationMODEL BRADY POLICY I. THE BRADY RULE
MODEL BRADY POLICY This Policy sets forth the prosecuting authority s disclosure requirements regarding witnesses and is intended to assure compliance with the law, to protect witnesses and defendants
More information6. Secondary evidence rule. 7. CEC 352 discretion to exclude for unfair prejudice. a 2/3 vote by legislature after 1982.
EVIDENCE OUTLINE 1. Key CA Distinction ( Truth in Evidence Amendment) a. Proposition 8 makes all relevant evidence admissible in a criminal case. i. Exceptions: 1. Exclusionary rules under the US Constitution
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED December 28, 2006 v No. 263625 Grand Traverse Circuit Court COLE BENJAMIN HOOKER, LC No. 04-009631-FC
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
1 1 Innocence Legal Team 00 S. Main Street, Suite Walnut Creek, CA Telephone: -000 Attorney for Defendant SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ) Case No. CALIFORNIA, ) ) POINTS
More informationCOUNSEL JUDGES. STOWERS, J. wrote the opinion. WE CONCUR: DAN SOSA, JR., Senior Justice, WILLIAM RIORDAN, Justice AUTHOR: STOWERS OPINION
1 STATE V. WORLEY, 1984-NMSC-013, 100 N.M. 720, 676 P.2d 247 (S. Ct. 1984) STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. CURTIS WORLEY, Defendant-Appellant No. 14691 SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO 1984-NMSC-013,
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR LAKE COUNTY
Terri Wood, OSB #88332 Law Office of Terri Wood, P.C. 730 Van Buren Street Eugene, Oregon 97402 541-484-4171 Attorney for John Doe IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR LAKE COUNTY STATE OF OREGON,
More informationBAR ASSOCIATION OF QUEENSLAND BARRISTERS CONDUCT RULES. 23 February 2018
BAR ASSOCIATION OF QUEENSLAND BARRISTERS CONDUCT RULES 23 February 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE... 1 PART A NATIONAL RULES... 1 INTRODUCTION... 1 Objects... 1 Principles... 1 Interpretation... 2 Application
More informationNew Hampshire Supreme Court October 13, 2016 Oral Argument Case Summary
New Hampshire Supreme Court October 13, 2016 Oral Argument Case Summary CASE #1 State of New Hampshire v. Kyree Rice (2015-0457) Attorney Christopher M. Johnson, Chief Appellate Defender, for the defendant,
More information