MBE PRACTICE QUESTIONS SET 1 EVIDENCE
|
|
- Beryl Houston
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 MBE PRACTICE QUESTIONS SET 1 EVIDENCE
2 Copyright 2016 by BARBRI, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America.
3 MBE PRACTICE QUESTIONS 1. EVIDENCE QUESTIONS Question 1 An airline passenger was on trial for attempting to smuggle illegal drugs into the country. The prosecution is seeking to present evidence that when the passenger had passed the entry area carrying a small suitcase, a police dog had sniffed at the suitcase and started barking, prompting the passenger to run into a men s room, open his suitcase, and flush a bag down the toilet before anyone could apprehend him. The dog s handler is prepared to testify that the dog has been trained not to bark unless it detected illegal drugs, and that the dog started barking after sniffing the suitcase. If the defense seeks to exclude the testimony by the dog handler describing the dog s reaction to the suitcase, how should the court proceed? (A) Admit the evidence, under a hearsay exception. (B) Admit the evidence, because the offered evidence shows that the dog would not have barked unless illegal drugs had been present. (C) Exclude the evidence, because it is hearsay not within any recognized exception to the hearsay rule. (D) Exclude the evidence, because it violates the Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution. Question 2 An engineer sued a business owner, claiming that they had entered into an oral agreement whereby the business owner agreed to hire the engineer as chief engineer of his business, that the engineer agreed to take the job at a specified salary, and that the business owner had subsequently breached their employment contract by refusing to hire the engineer. At the trial of the engineer s suit, the business owner took the stand and denied having any contract with the engineer for employment or otherwise. In response, the engineer offers into evidence an authenticated picture postcard that the business owner had mailed to his wife while on a business trip. One statement on the postcard clearly referring to the engineer reads, Keep it under your hat for now, but I ve offered him the chief engineer position and he s accepted. The business owner s attorney objects. Should the court admit the postcard? (A) Yes, because it is the statement of a partyopponent. (B) Yes, if it is a recent impression. (C) No, because it is a privileged communication between husband and wife. (D) No, because it is hearsay not within any recognized exception to the hearsay rule. PA1
4 2. EVIDENCE Question 3 The plaintiff slipped on a patch of ice at the defendant s home and is suing the defendant for negligence. The defendant denies that the plaintiff was injured in the fall. The defendant calls his neighbor to testify that right after the plaintiff fell, she said that she had a recurring hip injury and was experiencing a flare-up. Should the court admit the neighbor s testimony? (A) No, because it constitutes inadmissible hearsay. (B) No, because it is irrelevant. (C) Yes, because it qualifies as an excited utterance. (D) Yes, because it is a statement of a partyopponent. Question 4 At the defendant s arson trial, the prosecution offers to introduce the testimony of a police officer, who will testify that he showed a photographic lineup containing the defendant s picture to a witness who saw a man run from the building right before it burned down, and the witness selected the defendant s picture. The witness has moved out of state and cannot be persuaded or compelled to return to testify. Should this evidence be admitted over the defendant s objection? (A) Yes, it is a past recollection recorded. (B) Yes, it is a prior identification. (C) No, it is hearsay not within an exception. (D) No, because the picture of the defendant is not properly authenticated.
5 MBE PRACTICE QUESTIONS 3. Question 5 In a wrongful death action, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant intentionally caused the death of the plaintiff s husband, who was the defendant s co-worker. At trial, the plaintiff s attorney called another co-worker to the stand as a witness. The defendant s attorney did not object to the witness s testimony that there had been bad blood at work between the deceased and the defendant. However, the attorney objected to one line of questioning, but he was overruled by the judge. The line of questioning was as follows: Attorney: Now, you ve told us how the deceased came back to the shop after he had obviously been hit hard on the jaw. What did he say at that time? Witness: He said that the defendant did it, and just then I noticed that the defendant was in the shop too. Attorney: What did the defendant do? Question 6 A pedestrian sued a driver, alleging that the driver s car ran a red light and struck the pedestrian in a crosswalk. At trial, the pedestrian s attorney wishes to call an emergency room nurse to testify that, when the pedestrian was brought in, she asked him how he was injured and he replied, I was hit by a car that ran a red light. If the driver s attorney objects, how should the court rule regarding the nurse s testimony? (A) Admit it, as a present sense impression. (B) Admit it, because the statement was made to the nurse for purposes of medical treatment. (C) Exclude it, as hearsay not within any recognized exception to the hearsay rule. (D) Exclude it, because the pedestrian is available to testify. Witness: He just smirked and started laughing. Was the judge correct in overruling the objection to the admission of this portion of the witness s testimony? (A) Yes, because it is a statement against interest by the defendant. (B) Yes, because it is an adoptive statement by a party-opponent. (C) No, because the introduction of the deceased s out-of-court statement would violate the defendant s right to confront witnesses. (D) No, because the deceased s statement that the defendant did it is hearsay, and cannot qualify as a dying declaration.
6 4. EVIDENCE Question 7 In an automobile collision case, the defendant s attorney called the defendant to the stand and asked, Was the traffic light red, amber, or green when you entered the intersection? The defendant replied, It was green. Next, the defendant s attorney asked, What did you tell the first police officer who arrived on the scene about the condition of the traffic light when you entered the intersection? Before the defendant could reply with I told him it was green, the plaintiff s attorney objected. How should the court respond to the objection? (A) Sustain it, because the statement is hearsay not within any recognized exception to the hearsay rule. (B) Sustain it, because the testimony is an irrelevant prior consistent statement. (C) Overrule it, because the statement is made from personal knowledge and, therefore, is nonhearsay. (D) Overrule it, because the defendant is in court and is subject to cross-examination by the plaintiff s attorney. Question 8 At a homicide trial, the prosecution presented evidence that, on the day of the fatal shooting, the defendant and several members of his gang engaged in a running gun battle with the victim and members of his gang. The prosecution additionally presented evidence tending to prove that the defendant had been seen at the scene of the shooting around the time that the victim was killed. In his defense, the defendant proffered testimony of a witness that, one day before the victim s death, the defendant had said to him, I m flying to the state capital tonight for a two-day visit. Should the witness s testimony be admitted over the objection of the prosecution? (A) Yes, because it is not being offered for the truth of the matter asserted. (B) Yes, because it tends to prove that the defendant was in the state capital at the time the charged crime was committed. (C) No, because it is inadmissible hearsay. (D) No, because it violates the propensity rule.
7 MBE PRACTICE QUESTIONS 5. Question 9 A plaintiff sued a chimney sweeping company for personal injury and property damages resulting from an explosion in her chimney the evening after the company had cleaned it. The explosion, which occurred when the plaintiff lit a fire in the fireplace, caused minor damage to the chimney, roof, and to the plaintiff, who was hit by falling bricks. As evidence that she assumed the risk of injury, the company offers to have its foreman testify that he had told the plaintiff not to use the fireplace for 24 hours to allow certain chemicals to evaporate. Is the foreman s proposed testimony hearsay? (A) No, because the declarant is testifying as a witness at the hearing. (B) No, because the statement is not offered for its truth. Question 10 During the defendant s trial for armed robbery, evidence was introduced establishing that a rifle was found in the trunk of the defendant s car when he was arrested. On direct examination, the defendant testified that when he was arrested and the rifle was found, he stated, I keep that with me for protection. Should the court allow the testimony? (A) Yes, because it is a statement of a party. (B) Yes, because it is an excited utterance. (C) No, because it is hearsay not within an exception. (D) No, because it is a self-serving statement. (C) Yes, but it should be admitted as part of the res gestae. (D) Yes, but it should be admitted under the present state of mind exception to the hearsay rule.
8 6. EVIDENCE Question 11 A pedestrian sued a local bar for injuries he suffered when he was struck by a car driven by a bar patron that had run a red light. He claimed that the patron was permitted to drink too much liquor at the bar before leaving. At trial, the pedestrian called a witness to the stand. The witness testified that she and a friend had visited the bar on the night in question. The witness seeks to testify that she remarked about the patron to her friend, Look at that guy. He s so drunk he can t even stand up. Is the witness s testimony concerning her remark to her friend admissible? (A) Yes, as a prior consistent statement. (B) Yes, as a present sense impression. (C) Yes, as an excited utterance. (D) No, because it is hearsay not within any exception. Question 12 In a suit to recover injuries after a car accident at an intersection, the plaintiff testified that she had had the right-of-way at the intersection. The defendant s attorney did not cross-examine the plaintiff. The plaintiff then called a witness to testify that, shortly after the collision, as she pulled the plaintiff from the car, the witness heard the plaintiff say, I think I m dying! Didn t the other driver see I had the right-of-way? Should the court admit the testimony? (A) Yes, because the plaintiff s statement was made under belief of impending death. (B) Yes, because the plaintiff s statement was an excited utterance. (C) No, because the plaintiff s credibility has not been attacked. (D) No, because the plaintiff s belief that she had the right-of-way has already been established without contradiction.
9 MBE PRACTICE QUESTIONS 7. Question 13 The declarant collapsed at her wedding reception after drinking champagne during the wedding toast. A group of guests surrounded her after she collapsed. As she was struggling to maintain consciousness, she declared, I knew my new husband was after my money. Make sure he is brought to justice for murdering me. The declarant lost consciousness and lapsed into a coma; she remains in a vegetative state. It was determined that she was poisoned, and her husband was arrested and charged with attempted murder. At trial, the prosecution wishes to call one of the guests to testify to the declarant s statement after her collapse. Should the court admit the proposed testimony? (A) No, because it is hearsay not within any exception. (B) Yes, as an excited utterance. (C) Yes, as evidence of the declarant s state of mind. (D) Yes, because it is a dying declaration. Question 14 A passenger in a vehicle that was struck by another car sued the other car s driver, claiming that the collision severely injured his right leg. The defendant claimed that the plaintiff s leg injury resulted from an earlier, unrelated industrial accident. At trial, after having testified to his pain from the injury allegedly caused by the defendant, the plaintiff called as a witness the physician who treated him. The physician offers to testify that the plaintiff told him that his earlier leg problems had completely cleared up before the alleged injury caused by the defendant. If the defendant objects to the admission of this testimony, how should the court proceed? (A) Admit it, as a statement of a party. (B) Admit it, as a statement for purposes of diagnosis and treatment. (C) Exclude it, because of the physician-patient privilege. (D) Exclude it, because the statement related to a past physical condition.
10 8. EVIDENCE Question 15 In a medical malpractice action, the plaintiff sought to have her neighbor testify that, the day after receiving treatment on her back from the defendant, the plaintiff told the neighbor that her back was getting worse. Upon proper objection, how should the court rule on this testimony? (A) Admit it, because it is a statement of personal history. (B) Admit it, because it is a statement of a thenexisting physical condition. (C) Exclude it, because it is hearsay not within any exception. (D) Exclude it, because it was not made for the purpose of medical treatment. Question 16 The issue in a civil case was whether the plaintiff was old enough to get married. The defendant sought to prove that the plaintiff was old enough by calling an employee of the county, who authenticated a photocopy of the plaintiff s birth certificate. The plaintiff objected to introduction of the photocopy. Is the photocopy of the birth certificate admissible? (A) Yes, because it is a past recollection recorded. (B) Yes, because it is a public record. (C) No, because it is not the best evidence. (D) No, because it is inadmissible hearsay.
11 MBE PRACTICE QUESTIONS 9. Question 17 One of the issues in dispute at a civil trial was ownership of a particular building over a 50-year period. The plaintiff wishes to introduce into evidence a 25-year-old newspaper that will show that the defendant owned the building at that time. The defendant s attorney objects. Should the newspaper be admitted? (A) Yes, because it is an ancient document. (B) Yes, because it is a self-authenticating document. (C) Yes, because it is an ancient document and it is self-authenticating. (D) No, because it is inadmissible hearsay.
12
EVIDENCE 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 informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Evidence And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question Paul sued David in federal court
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 informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Evidence And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question While driving their cars, Paula
More informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Evidence And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question Dustin has been charged with participating
More informationEvidence Study & Review Session One Learning from Multiple Choice
Evidence Study & Review Session One Learning from Multiple Choice Directions: Please move into groups of three or four people. First, as a group, decide what you think are the key big picture concepts
More informationArgumentative Questions (Badgering) Assuming Facts Not in Evidence (Extrapolation) Irrelevant Evidence Hearsay Opinion Lack of Personal Knowledge
Argumentative Questions (Badgering) Assuming Facts Not in Evidence (Extrapolation) Irrelevant Evidence Hearsay Opinion Lack of Personal Knowledge Asked and Answered Outside the Scope of Cross Examination
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 informationEVIDENCE Copyright July 1999 State Bar of California
EVIDENCE Copyright July 1999 State Bar of California Mary Smith sued Dr. Jones, alleging that Jones negligently performed surgery on her back, leaving her partly paralyzed. In her case-in-chief, Mary called
More informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Evidence And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question Dave brought his sports car into
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 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 informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION,
More informationMASSACHUSETTS SCHOOL OF LAW EVIDENCE CLOSED BOOK FINAL EXAlYl1NATION DECEMBER 17, 2002 PROFESSOR TIMOTHY CAGLE
MASSACHUSETTS SCHOOL OF LAW EVIDENCE CLOSED BOOK FINAL EXAlYl1NATION DECEMBER 17, 2002 PROFESSOR TIMOTHY CAGLE DO NOT OPEN THE TEST BOOKLET IJNTIL TOLD TO DO SO. WRITE YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER ---------
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 informationExample: (1) Your honor, (2) I object (3) to that question (4) because it is a compound question.
MOCK TRIAL SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE Criminal trials are conducted using strict rules of evidence to promote fairness. To participate in a Mock Trial, you need to know its rules of evidence. The California
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 information4. RELEVANCE. A. The Relevance Rule
4. RELEVANCE A. The Relevance Rule The most basic rule of evidence is that it must be relevant to the case. Irrelevant evidence should be excluded. If we are trying a bank robbery case, the witnesses should
More informationMIDDLE SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE
MIDDLE SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE Revised August 2015 Rules Unique to Middle School Mock Trial I. Invention of Facts and Extrapolation The object of these rules is to prevent a team
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed November 10, Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Fae Hoover-Grinde,
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 0-485 / 09-0150 Filed November 10, 2010 STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. JACOVAN DERONTE BUSH, Defendant-Appellant. Judge. Appeal from the Iowa District Court
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 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 informationAppendix 3J Training Memo How a Prosecutor Reads a Domestic Violence Related Police Report
Appendix 3J Training Memo How a Prosecutor Reads a Domestic Violence Related Police Report Adapted from Domestic Violence: The Law Enforcement Response, a training curriculum from The Domestic Abuse Intervention
More informationMBE WORKSHOP: CRIMINAL LAW PROFESSOR LISA MCELROY DREXEL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW
CHAPTER 1: CRIMINAL LAW MBE WORKSHOP: CRIMINAL LAW PROFESSOR LISA MCELROY DREXEL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW Editor's Note 1: While the below outline is taken from the National Conference of Bar Examiners'
More informationF 3.201(2)(A) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS ) JOHN D. DOE, ) ) Case No. Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) THOMAS M. SMITH, ) ) Defendant.
F 3.201(2)(A) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS ) JOHN D. DOE, ) ) Case No. Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) THOMAS M. SMITH, ) ) Defendant. ) ) Interrogatories from Plaintiff to Defendant 1. Please
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2012
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2012 Opinion filed April 25, 2012. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D10-1361 Lower Tribunal No.
More informationREPORTED OF MARYLAND. No. 751
REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 751 September Term, 2001 JOSE ANDRADE v. SHANAZ HOUSEIN, ET AL. Murphy, C.J., Sonner, Getty, James S. (Ret'd, Specially Assigned), JJ. Getty, J.
More informationExcuses. to avoid paying a fair & reasonable settlement. By Eddie & Chuck Farah, Attorneys At Law
Excuses used by insurance companies to avoid paying a fair & reasonable settlement. By Eddie & Chuck Farah, Attorneys At Law YOUR FUTURE IS WORTH FIGHTING FOR. When you've been injured in a car accident,
More informationROY L. REARDON AND MARY ELIZABETH MCGARRY * SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS ROUNDUP: EVIDENTIARY ISSUES IN MEDICAL MALPRACTICE, RES IPSA, AND EXPERT TESTIMONY ON EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION ROY L. REARDON AND MARY ELIZABETH MCGARRY * SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS LYNDA HUSULAK, as Personal Representative of the Estate of George Husulak, Deceased, UNPUBLISHED October 17, 2006 Plaintiff-Appellee, v No. 267986 Macomb Circuit Court
More informationIN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE * * * *
IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE * * * * JANE HEALY, Plaintiff, CASE NO.: CR09-100 vs. DEPT. NO.: 1 CHARLES RAYMOND, an individual, ALLEGRETTI
More informationSubmitted August 1, 2017 Decided. Before Judges Hoffman and Currier.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding
More informationThe Complainant submits this complaint to the Court and states that there is probable cause to believe Defendant committed the following offense(s):
State of Minnesota County of Wright State of Minnesota, vs. Plaintiff, SAMARA LEIGH JUHL DOB: 01/27/1994 7734 Lancaster Avenue NE Otsego, MN 55301 Defendant. Prosecutor File No. Court File No. District
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c; ARCAP 28(c; Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 IN THE COURT OF
More informationPreparing for the Multistate Bar Exam (MBE)
Preparing for the Multistate Bar Exam (MBE) Workshop Objectives 1. Participants will reinforce their substantive knowledge of Evidence. 2. Participants will increase their understanding of the format and
More information58 th Mid-Year Meeting Introducing Evidence in Family Court
Vermont Bar Association Seminar Materials 58 th Mid-Year Meeting Introducing Evidence in Family Court March 20, 2014 Hilton Burlington, VT Faculty: Hon. Amy Davenport Priscilla Bondy Dubé, Esq. Christopher
More informationJE 12 AM IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE. VERELLEN, C.J. Trina Cortese's son, Tanner Trosko, died from mechanical
FILE COURT OF APPE.ALS OW 1 STATE OF WASE::-1C:101! JE 12 AM IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE TRINA CORTESE, an individual, and No. 76748-8-1 TRINA CORTESE, as personal representative
More informationThe important role played by legal nurse consultants in all phases of civil cases, with a Case Example. By Paul Parks RN, LNC
The important role played by legal nurse consultants in all phases of civil cases, with a Case Example By Paul Parks RN, LNC In this presentation I will give an example of a civil case from start to finish.
More informationADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE GENERAL ASPECTS OF CRIMINAL LAW. Name: Period: Row:
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE GENERAL ASPECTS OF CRIMINAL LAW Name: Period: Row: I. INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL LAW A. Understanding the complexities of criminal law 1. The justice system in the United States
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 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 informationAppellate Court Decisions - Week of 9/9/13
Appellate Court Decisions - Week of 9/9/13 First Appellate District of Ohio Sixth Appellate District of Ohio In re K.A., 2013-Ohio-3847 Juvenile Delinquency: Jail Time Credit Full Decision: http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/6/2013/2013-ohio-
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Filed 7/25/11 P. v. Hurtado CA1/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication
More informationThe Illinois Dead Man s Act
The Illinois Dead Man s Act S eminar Topic: This program examines what exactly the Dead Man s Act is, when and whom it applies to, exceptions to the Act, and cases involving the Dead Man s Act This program
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 informationNORTH CAROLINA SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES BENCHBOOK VOIR DIRE ON PRETRIAL AND IN-COURT IDENTIFICATION
VOIR DIRE ON PRETRIAL AND IN-COURT IDENTIFICATION Robert Farb (UNC School of Government, Mar. 2015) Contents I. Introduction... 1 II. Findings of Fact... 2 III. Conclusions of Law... 7 IV. Order... 9 V.
More informationAPPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Racine County: FAYE M. FLANCHER, Judge. Affirmed. Before Brown, C.J., Reilly and Gundrum, JJ.
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED November 13, 2013 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court of Appeals NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear
More informationSENTENCE NOTE OF MR JUSTICE GOOSE 25 MAY 2018
IN THE CROWN COURT AT BIRMINGHAM R v KAYNE ROBINSON, DARIELLE WILLIAMS, DEVONTE MAY & GEARY BARNETT SENTENCE NOTE OF MR JUSTICE GOOSE 25 MAY 2018 1. Kayne Robinson and Darielle Williams, you have both
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED September 9, 2003 v No. 235372 Mason Circuit Court DENNIS RAY JENSEN, LC No. 00-015696 Defendant-Appellant.
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT FRANK BELLEZZA, Appellant, v. JAMES MENENDEZ and CRARY BUCHANAN, P.A., Appellees. No. 4D17-3277 [March 6, 2019] Appeal from the Circuit
More informationJULY 2002 NRPA LAW REVIEW SECURITY QUESTIONED IN STADIUM PARKING LOT MISHAP AT MUSIC FESTIVAL. James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D James C.
SECURITY QUESTIONED IN STADIUM PARKING LOT MISHAP AT MUSIC FESTIVAL James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. 2002 James C. Kozlowski In the case of Florman v. City of New York, No. 497 (N.Y.App.Div. 05/07/2002),
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 informationScott Pearce s Master MBE Method Evidence
- 93 - Scott Pearce s Master MBE Method Evidence - 94 - Evidence - Official National Conference of Bar Examiners Outline of Testable Issues I. Presentation of evidence A. Introduction of evidence 1. Requirement
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT LEON REID, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D12-2303 [June 21, 2017] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial
More informationSTATE OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT. Plaintiff, Defendants.
[YOUR NAME] [YOUR ADDRESS] Telephone: [YOUR PHONE NUMBER] [YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS] Fax: [YOUR FAX NUMBER] STATE OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT 1 1 1 1 1 1, a [single/married man/woman], v. Plaintiff,
More informationINTRODUCTION OF EXHIBITS AT TRIAL THE BASICS
INTRODUCTION OF EXHIBITS AT TRIAL THE BASICS What are exhibits? Exhibits are types of evidence that are tangible. There are basically four types of exhibits. First, there is real evidence (the gun involved
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 informationThe Criminal Hypothetical and Other Unique Aspects of the Criminal Law Interview Process
The Criminal Hypothetical and Other Unique Aspects of the Criminal Law Interview Process by Nicole Vikan and Jory H. Fisher Criminal law is a unique practice area with a distinctive interview process.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS LARRY RIDNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED October 28, 2003 v No. 240710 Monroe Circuit Court CHARLEY RAFKO TOWNE and CAROL SUE LC No. 99-010343-NI TOWNE, Defendants-Appellees.
More information4. CROSS EXAMINATION 159
4. CROSS EXAMINATION 159 160 Trial Advocacy, Cross-Examination: The Basics Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan Cross-examination involves relatively straightforward skills. Through preparation of your case,
More informationPLAINTIFF S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPOSITION TO DEFENDANT S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF A DEMURRER
P.J. Attorney Esq. Attorney I.D. No. 44119 200 JFK Boulevard, Suite 901 Philadelphia, PA 19000 (610) 555-2234 / Fax (610) 555-2233 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, PHILADELPHIA COUNTY,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT MEMPHIS February 25, 2015 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT MEMPHIS February 25, 2015 Session FAIRY BERRY v. CITY OF MEMPHIS Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT00310304 Karen R. Williams, Judge No.
More informationTHURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT
THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER Date Issued: June 19, 2006 Effective Date: June 19, 2006 Order No: Chapter 35.2 Authority: Chief of Police Gregory L. Eyler Subject: ALCOHOL and or DRUG IMPAIRED
More informationCase 1:02-cr PKC Document 54 Filed 08/15/08 Page 1 of 6 U.S. Department of Justice
Case 1:02-cr-01231-PKC Document 54 Filed 08/15/08 Page 1 of 6 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of New York BY HAND TO CHAMBERS United States District Judge Southern District
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS ESTATE OF AVA CAMERON TAYLOR, by AMY TAYLOR, Personal Representative, UNPUBLISHED April 13, 2017 Plaintiff-Appellant, v No. 331198 Genesee Circuit Court DARIN LEE COOLE
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 informationProving Your Case in Supreme Court
Proving Your Case in Supreme Court Part 1 About the Supreme Court of BC If you are preparing your case to be heard in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, there is a lot you will need to know about the
More informationThinking Evidentially
Thinking Evidentially Writing & Arguing Powerful Motions October 17, 2013 2013 www.rossdalecle.com Presentation of Proof Plaintiff (or prosecutor) presents case-in-chief, then rests; When witnesses are
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 informationTOP TEN NEW EVIDENCE RULES
K.I.S.S. TOP TEN NEW EVIDENCE RULES Paul S. Milich Georgia State University College of Law Atlanta, Georgia 1 of 9 Institute of Continuing Legal Education K.I.S.S Keep It Short & Simple November 14, 2014
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON November 5, 2002 Session
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON November 5, 2002 Session MICHAEL JOSEPH SPADAFINA v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Benton County No. CR451 Julian
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-0793-13T1 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION
More informationIN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE. Plaintiff v. Defendant TRIAL BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF
1 1 1 CASE NO. ========================================================== IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE ==========================================================
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE JAMES BAZINET. Argued: October 19, 2017 Opinion Issued: April 10, 2018
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationHOT TOPIC ISSUE: SPOILATION. General Liability Track, Session 3 Fifth Annual General Liability & Workers Compensation Seminar
HOT TOPIC ISSUE: SPOILATION General Liability Track, Session 3 Fifth Annual General Liability & Workers Compensation Seminar Carlock, Copeland & Stair Speaker: Scott Huray, Partner WHAT IS IT? Spoliation
More informationOF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT. vs. ** CASE NO. 3D THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ** LOWER TRIBUNAL NO Appellee. **
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JANUARY TERM, A.D., 2003 YAITE GONZALEZ-VALDES, ** Appellant, ** vs. ** CASE NO. 3D00-2972 THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ** LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 98-6042
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON. STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BILLY HANCOCK
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BILLY HANCOCK Appeal as of Right from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 98-12271, 98-12272, 98-12273, 98-12275, 98-12276
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 informationPolice: man stole undercover FBI car
CRIMINAL EVIDENCE WORKSHOP Fall 2014 PROBLEM NO. 1 This article appeared in the Miami Herald: Police: man stole undercover FBI car 02 Apr 2013, 6:35 AM EDT MIAMI - Police arrested a man they say stole
More informationANSWER TO QUESTION 1 1) At issue is whether a corporation may be held liable on a contract that predates its incorporation.
Question-One In January 1998, Bob entered into a contract with John, a local window craftsman, for the purchase of hand-made, stained-glass windows for his home. The purchase price was $10,000. The windows
More informationIn the Circuit Court for Prince George s County Case No. CT X IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No. 18. September Term, 2005 WENDELL HACKLEY
In the Circuit Court for Prince George s County Case No. CT 02-0154X IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 18 September Term, 2005 WENDELL HACKLEY v. STATE OF MARYLAND Bell, C.J. Raker Wilner Cathell
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 informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS MARSHA PEREZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED April 12, 2005 v No. 250418 Wayne Circuit Court STC, INC., d/b/a MCDONALD S and STATE LC No. 02-229289-NO FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY., Counsel of Record. The following interrogatories are pattern interrogatories, which the undersigned
, SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY Plaintiff, Case No. 1 v., Defendant. DEFENDANT TO PLAINTIFF TO: AND TO:, Plaintiff;, Counsel of Record. The following interrogatories are pattern interrogatories,
More informationStandard Interrogatories. Under Supreme Court Rule 213(j)
Standard Interrogatories Under Supreme Court Rule 213(j) Under Supreme Court Rule 213(j), "[t]he Supreme Court, by administrative order, may approve standard forms of interrogatories for different classes
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. JAMES DEMARCO WILLIAMS : (Criminal Appeal from Common : Pleas Court)
[Cite as State v. Williams, 2005-Ohio-213.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO : Plaintiff-Appellant : C.A. Case No. 20368 vs. : T.C. Case No. 03-CR-3333 JAMES DEMARCO WILLIAMS
More informationThe Honorable Janice G Clark Judge Presiding
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2011 CA 0007 JAMES A WILSON AND BRENDA M WILSON VERSUS STATE OF LOUISIANA THROUGH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT Judgment Rendered AUG
More informationState of Wisconsin: Circuit Court: Racine County: v. Case Nos. 2002CF763, 973,1215
State of Wisconsin: Circuit Court: Racine County: State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff, v. Case Nos. 2002CF763, 973,1215 Thomas C. Burton, Defendant. Defendant's Memorandum in Opposition to State's Motion in
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 3, 2004
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 3, 2004 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. COREY LAMONT RADLEY Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 2001-B-1114
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 informationEVIDENCE / CIVIL PROCEDURE Copyright February State Bar of California
Copyright February 1996 - State Bar of California Dave, owner of a physical fitness center known as "Dave's Gym," is being sued by Paul for negligence. Paul claims that he sustained permanent injuries
More informationPolice: man stole undercover FBI car
CRIMINAL EVIDENCE WORKSHOP Fall 2013 PROBLEM NO. 1 Police: man stole undercover FBI car 02 Apr 2013, 6:35 AM EDT MIAMI - Police arrested a man they say stole an undercover FBI car from a car dealership
More informationINTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT. 1. State your full name, your present address, and date of birth.
INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT 1. State your full name, your present address, and date of birth. 2. If the complaint filed herein arose out of a motor vehicle incident (incident is defined as the accident
More information8 th Amendment. Yes = it describes a cruel and unusual punishment No = if does not
8 th Amendment Yes = it describes a cruel and unusual punishment No = if does not 1. Electric Chair Mistake A person is sentenced to death for murder. On the first try, the electric chair shocks the prisoner
More informationEXPLAINING THE COURTS AN INFORMATION BOOKLET
EXPLAINING THE COURTS AN INFORMATION BOOKLET AT SOME STAGE IN OUR LIVES, EVERY ONE OF US IS LIKELY TO HAVE TO GO TO COURT FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER. WE MIGHT BE ASKED TO SIT ON A JURY OR TO GIVE EVIDENCE
More informationPolice Ride Alongs. In This Issue: Photograph Lineup. Pedestrian Infraction. Marijuana Odor on a Person
A Newsletter for the Criminal Justice Community Police Ride Alongs In This Issue: Photograph Lineup Pedestrian Infraction Marijuana Odor on a Person Legal Eagle Published by: Legal Eagle Services West
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE. RAYMOND DAVIS v. CITY OF CLARKSVILLE
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE RAYMOND DAVIS v. CITY OF CLARKSVILLE Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Montgomery County No. C11-409, James E. Walton, Judge No. M1999-00084-COA-R3-CV
More informationS18A1394. FAVORS v. THE STATE. a jury found him guilty of malice murder and other crimes in connection with
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: March 4, 2019 S18A1394. FAVORS v. THE STATE. BETHEL, Justice. Dearies Favors appeals from the denial of his motion for new trial after a jury found him guilty of
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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, * * * * * * * *
-a-slz 2017 S.D. 33 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, v. JEREMY JACOB GOODSHOT, Plaintiff and Appellee, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
More information