SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

Similar documents
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

Index. Adjudicative Facts Judicial notice, Administrative Rules Judicial notice,

Give a brief description of case, particularly the. confession at issue and the pertinent circumstances surrounding

SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE

Oklahoma High School Mock Trial Program RULES OF EVIDENCE ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS. Rule 101. Scope

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version)

CHEAT SHEET AUTHORITIES ON BRADY & STATE HABEAS PRACTICE

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) (updated 10/07)

2016 FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version)

RULES OF EVIDENCE Pennsylvania Mock Trial Version 2003

California Bar Examination

California Bar Examination

Thinking Evidentially

DELAWARE HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL RULES OF EVIDENCE

THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT CLARK COUNTY : : : : : : : : : :... O P I N I O N

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Why? Test Specific Knowledge Course Coverage Test Critical Reading Objective Grading

2011 RULES OF EVIDENCE

Case 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

CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION * APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

American Mock Trial Association MIDLANDS RULES OF EVIDENCE

California Bar Examination

PRINCE GEORGE S COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION LAW 101 March 1, 2012, 4:00p.m. Courtroom M1404 ASK A PROPER QUESTION - FACTUAL AND EXPERT WITNESSES

EMPIRION EVIDENCE ORDINANCE

Keith Berkshire Berkshire Law Office, PLLC

TRIAL OBJECTIONS. Considerations Effect on the jury Scrutinous Judiciously Effective/Disruptive

TOP TEN NEW EVIDENCE RULES

PlainSite. Legal Document. Missouri Eastern District Court Case No. 4:09-cv Jo Ann Howard and Associates, P.C. et al v.

Expert Testimony (April 16, 2008) Expert Testimony Offered to Prove the Primary Activities of the Gang

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA COMMITTEE ON RULES OF EVIDENCE. Proposed Amendment of Rule of Evidence 803.1(1)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

SIMULATED MBE ANALYSIS: EVIDENCE PROFESSOR ROBERT PUSHAW PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC TYRA WILLIAMS, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.

Federal Rules of Evidence ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

COURSE OUTLINE AND ASSIGNMENTS

EVIDENCE, FOUNDATIONS AND OBJECTIONS. Laurie Vahey, Esq.

Federal Rules Of Evidence (2012)

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS BELMONT COUNTY, OHIO. : Plaintiff : vs. : FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER : Case No. Defendant :

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC04-21 LOWER CASE NO.: 2D REPLY BRIEF OF PETITIONER S BRIEF ON THE MERITS

Contents. Dedication... v. About the Author... xvii. Acknowledgments... xix. Foreword... xxi. Preface... xxv A Note about Primary Sources...

14. HEARSAY A. INTRODUCTION

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2019

Evidence Presented by: Ervin Gonzalez, Esq.

American Criminal Law and Procedure Vocabulary

FULL OUTLINE. Bar Exam Doctor BAREXAMDOCTOR.COM. EVIDENCE

Rule 605. Competency of judge as witness. NC General Statutes - Chapter 8C Article 6 1

Examination, Cross-Examination, and Redirect Examination Penny J. White

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

BRADY DISCOVERY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT (INTERNAL POLICY) Revised April 22, 2010 INTRODUCTION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION

California Bar Examination

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA 1983 SESSION CHAPTER 701 HOUSE BILL 96 AN ACT TO SIMPLIFY AND CODIFY THE RULES OF EVIDENCE.

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2018

MAY UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS PURSUE CLAIMS FOR PAST WAGE LOSS IN CALIFORNIA AND NEVADA? MAYBE. MAYBE NOT.

TRIAL DOCUMENTS PROVING, TENDERING AND CROSS-EXAMINATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT

OF FLORIDA. A case of original jurisdiction habeas corpus.

Admissibility of Electronic Evidence

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION [NUMBER]

Defendants Trial Brief - 1 -

Evidence 101 A Primer on Evidence Law

EVIDENCE CALIFORNIA DISTINCTIONS Bar Exam Outline

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION [NUMBER]

Working With The Difficult Lawyer

New Jersey Rules of Evidence Article VI - Witnesses

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

COURT USE ONLY. DATE FILED: August 15, 2017

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT

Prior Statements in Montana: Part I

CIVIL EVIDENCE (JERSEY) LAW 2003

Case 1:05-cr RBW Document 271 Filed 02/07/2007 Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

DRAFT REVISED NORTHERN CHEYENNE LAW & ORDER CODE TITLE 6 RULES OF EVIDENCE CODE. Title 6 Page 1

CRAWFORD v. WASHINGTON: THE CONFRONTATION CLAUSE REBORN

Impeachment by omission. Impeachment for inconsistent statement. The Evidence Dance. Opening Statement Tip Twice

WHAT IS HEARSAY AND WHY DO WE CARE?

Serving the Law Enforcement Community and the Citizens of Washington

AARONSON RAPPAPORT FEINSTEIN & DEUTSCH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 600 THIRD AVENUE, NEW YORK, N.Y Luc:

CROSS AND TAPPER ON EVIDENCE

Where did the law of evidence come from/why have the law of evidence? Check on the power of executive government (Guantanamo Bay).

Case 3:07-cr EDL Document 49 Filed 03/25/2008 Page 1 of 8

Case 1:10-cr RDB Document 85 Filed 03/18/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND NORTHERN DIVISION

elias ch00 fmt auto 1/27/03 12:45 PM Page i Federal Rules of Evidence Handbook

Impeachment in Louisiana State Courts:

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR LINN COUNTY

Evidence 213B Professor Schroeder (Fall 2015) Reading List / Course Assignments (Rev. 08/08/2015) Page 1

TIPS ON OFFERING EVIDENCE RELEVANCE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA - Alexandria Division -

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE

Volume 31 Number California. Litigation THE JOURNAL OF THE LITIGATION SECTION OF THE CLA

Investigations and Enforcement

Investigations and Enforcement

EVIDENCE / CIVIL PROCEDURE Copyright February State Bar of California

1. If several suspected offenders are involved in the same criminal. accusation or indictment, no defense attorney shall be allowed to represent

Cross-Examination Checklist

moves this Court for an order for the Disclosure of the Grand Jury Transcripts. This

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

Transcription:

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 AND AUTHORITIES Plaintiff, ) IN SUPPORT OF THE ADMISSION ) OF THE COMPLAINING WITNESS S vs. ) DIARY (or other writing) ) ), ) ) Date: Defendant. ) Time: ) Dept: I FACTS Set forth the facts in your particular case regarding the diary or other specific writing at issue, including its form (e.g., diary, letter, etc.), date, and contents. II ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE. According to California Constitution, art. I, (d) and Evidence Code 0, all relevant evidence is admissible in any criminal proceeding in this state. "Relevant evidence" is Summary of Pleading - 1

1 1 evidence having any tendency is reason to prove or disprove any material disputed fact. Included in this definition is evidence relevant to the credibility of a witness or hearsay declarant. (Evidence Code 0; People v. Scheid () Cal.th 1.) Also included in this definition is evidence that raises a reasonable doubt about a defendant's guilt. (People v. Hall () 1 Cald,.) Relevant evidence may only be excluded under three circumstances: (1) where it is unduly prejudicial or time consuming, per Evidence Code ; () where it is protected by privilege, per Evidence Code 00 through 0; or () where it constitutes inadmissible hearsay, per Evidence Code. III THE DOCUMENTS WRITTEN BY THE COMPLAINANT FULFILL THE BEST EVIDENCE AND AUTHENTICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSIBILITY. Before a writing or its contents can be introduced into evidence, the writing must be authenticated. (Evidence Code 01.) This may be done by introducing evidence sufficient to Summary of Pleading -

1 1 sustain a finding that the documents are what the proponent of the writing claims them to be. (Evidence Code 00.) Methods of authentication which the defendant is prepared to provide include: (1) evidence of the genuineness of the handwriting, established by either the testimony of a qualified lay witness, comparison by the trier of fact, or comparison by an expert with a genuine writing (see Evidence Code through ); or () evidence that the writing refers to or states matters that are unlikely to be known by anyone other that the alleged author of the writing. (Evidence Code ; People v. Olguin () 1 Cal.App.th 1, 1 [writing authenticated by content and location where found]; People v. Lynn () Cal.App.d, [jailhouse notes authenticated based on defendant-writer's statements to others after the notes were turned over to authorities, making it unlikely that anyone else had penned them].) According to the "best evidence rule," the original writing itself is admissible to prove the content of a writing. (Evidence Code.) The defense has the original documents and will present them at the appropriate time. Evidence Code does not preclude admission of the diary (or other writing). (Set forth specifically the particular facts and circumstances in your case as to why does not bar admission of the evidence. E.g., the evidence will Summary of Pleading -

1 1 not consume a substantial amount of time, confuse the jury, or is not unduly prejudicial to the prosecution's case.) IV THE COMPLAINING WITNESS HAS NO BASIS TO EXCLUDE HER WRITINGS BY A CLAIM OF PRIVILEGE. Unless provided by statute, no person has a privilege to refuse to: (1) be a witness; () disclose any matter or produce any writing, object or other thing; or () prevent another from being a witness or disclosing any matter or writing. (Evidence Code.) The potential statutory privileges permitting a witness to prevent the disclosure of a writing may be found in (Evidence Code 0 through 0.) None of these privileges apply to (insert victim's name in possessive form) situation as a complaining witness who has put her own veracity at issue. V MANY EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE APPLY TO RENDER THE WRITINGS ADMISSIBLE. The journal and diaries were written under circumstances supportive of their reliability and trustworthiness. (Insert victim's name) believed them to be safe from prying eyes as evidenced by their contents. She wrote of many intimate details Summary of Pleading -

1 1 of her personal life, and thus would have had no motive to lie when creating them. Initially, the journal and diaries will be introduced simply to prove that (insert victim's name) wrote the mere words which constitute the writings. Ultimately, however, they may be offered to prove the truth of the matters asserted therein. These writings are hearsay, since they are out of court statements and not made under oath. Nevertheless, several statutes permit admission of the contents of the writings, including but not limited to: (1) prior inconsistent statements, Evidence Code 1; () past recollection recorded, Evidence Code 1; () contemporaneous statement, Evidence Code ; () then existing mental state, Evidence Code ; () previously existing mental state, Evidence Code. CONCLUSION In view of the foregoing facts and discussion, the defense should be permitted to introduce the writings of the complaining witness as both exculpatory evidence and as negative impeachment of the alleged victim's credibility. Dated: Respectfully submitted, Summary of Pleading -

Attorney for Defendant 1 1 Summary of Pleading -