Relevance and hearsay objections

1. Relevance and hearsay objections Objecting and responding

2. relevance • Rule 201: Relevant testimony is physical evidence or testimony which tends to make a fact WHICH IS IMPORTANT to a case more or less probable than it would be without the evidence or testimony. ** Simple rule… ANY question you ask can be challenged as relevant, so be prepared to explain why you are asking anything or be prepared to explain why something is important to your argument.

3. Relevance- Objections • “If the probative value of the relevant evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger the evidence will cause UNFAIR PREJUDICE, CONFUSE THE ISSUES or RESULT IN A DELAY OR WASTE OF TIME, the court may EXCLUDE it” -Including testimony, evidence or wasting time..

4. Relevance- Unfair prejudice • Unfair Prejudice applies to defendant only (Witnesses are fair game) • Unfair Prejudicing a witness means presenting evidence that creates an unfair narrative or bias against a defendant

5. Relevance- Unfair prejudice • Example of Unfair Prejudice • “Jimmy was convicted of selling drugs in high school and is on trial for murder. If prosecution offers this evidence of a prior conviction for drug sales, it can be considered Irrelevant based on creating an unfair prejudice because there is no connection between drug sales and murder” • Goes to character

6. Relevance- Unfair prejudice • Rule 202: Character Evidence • “Evidence of character may NOT be introduced unless the defendants character is an issue in the case” • In a criminal Case, the Prosecution may NOT “Initiate” character evidence, but the defense can. If the defense opens questioning of character evidence, the prosecution then may respond by re-direct or cross examination of some other witness on the same topic..

7. Relevance- Confuse the issues • Questions meant to confuse the issues can be objected to, unless the person asking the questions can set the proper foundation for the questions and explain where they intend to allow the questions to lead to • Generally, its expected that the attorney will show the judge where they intend the questions to lead through some foundation

8. Relevance- Confuse the issues • HOW TO SET FOUNDATION • A: If you have set the foundation, you explain to the judge how you did this • B. IF you have NOT set the foundation, you ask the judge for permission to set the foundation

9. Relevance- Confuse the issues • HOW TO SET FOUNDATION • “How long have you known the defendant?” • “Describe your relationship..” • “What knowledge do you have of the defendant committing the act?” • “Has the defendant ever talked to you about committing this criminal act” • “How?”

10. Relevance- Undue delay or waste of time • Can be used for excessive bad objections • Going off the topic • Attempting to “reach for straws” (In other words, creating some fake narrative)

11. Relevance- Other crimes, wrongs or acts • Rule 203: Evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts is not admissible to PROVE CHARACTER, unless you establish a PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR and connect it

12. Relevance- Other crimes, wrongs or acts • Can be admitted for some other reasons • To show motive (Why crime was committed), intent (Understand their actions), preparation, knowledge or Identity

13. Relevance- Other crimes, wrongs or acts example Jimmy, the defendant is asked the following question • Jimmy, isn’t it true, you have experience opening safe’s (Yes) • Isn't it also true, you have convicted of robbing store safes before this trial? (OBJECTION, relevance.. Goes to character) • RESPONSE: “Your honor, this line of questioning IS relevant as it does not go to character, rather its being offered to show that the defendant has demonstrated KNOWLEDGE of breaking into safes in the past”

14. Relevance- Other crimes, wrongs or acts • What does it mean to be able to Identity? • Defendant is on trial for stealing someone's Identity and questions are asked about where a person was at a particular time, which seems to be irrelevant to the case, but it can be argued that they are being asked to Identify someone's location at the time a crime took place.

15. Lets take a break…. • Final Planning for our table for Homecoming week • Plans…

16. hearsay • Out of Court Statement • Made by someone other than the declarant • Offered for the truth of the matter asserted

17. hearsay • WHY IS HEARAY OBJECTIONABLE • If its being offered for the truth of the matter, the witness is testifying to what someone meant by what they said and this can be dangerous • It can be excluded because the opposing party was denied the opportunity to cross examine the declarant about the statement

18. hearsay • WHY DO THEY NEED TO BE CROSS EXAMINED?? • Opposing party need to test the declarants perception (How well did they observe the event they made the statement about) • Test their sincerity (Were they serious or deliberately falsifying) • Test their ability to relate (Did they really mean what they said)

19. hearsay • If a statement is offered based on some witness who is in court, the judge may allow it as it can be offered against the parties interest • They are in court, therefore they can agree they may it or deny saying it and can explain its meaning • Also, they cannot claim the witness cannot be cross examined over the statement, as they can be • This applies to both written and spoken statements

20. Hearsay- Exceptions • Some Hearsay may be allowable if it fits into the mock trial rule exceptions • For exceptions to be offered, you must set a foundation for how you are using each

21. Hearsay- Exception Rule 402 • ADMISSION OF A PARTY OPPONENT • This is based on a statement being overhead as an admission of guilt, an admission the defendant committed the act or an admission of planning • In other words, an admission of fault

22. Hearsay- Exception Rule 403 • STATE OF MIND • This exception is based on pain or intent needed to prove a theory • Offered to show intent, plan, motive, design or mental feeling • Can be used by defense to show the defendant is the wrong person

23. Hearsay- Exception Rule 404 • BUSINESS RECORDS • Judge may admit a memo, report, record or data compilation concerning an event • The document must be “Kept and Maintained in the regular course of business” • In other words, the witness offering it must be able to verify the documents authenticity in some way

24. Hearsay- Exception Rule 405 • PRESENT SENSE IMPRESSION • Statements made “While the event is taking place” • Blurting something out while an accident is taking place or making an emotional statement before a crime occurs • Must set foundation to show the person had no time to think about their statement, they just made it

25. Hearsay- Exception Rule 406 • STATEMENTS IN LEARNED TREATISES • Statements taken from journals or publications that are believed as credible sources for an expert. • Foundation for source must be made • Can be used to cross examine an experts opinions

26. Hearsay- Exception Rule 407 • STATEMENTS BY AN UNAVAILABLE DECLARANT • Only used in civil trials based on if a reasonable person who make the same determination as the witness testifying