GENUINE Evidence Midterm Questions
With Answers
Harmless Error Rule - CORRECT ANSWER-A wrong decision that would not have
changed the outcome
Motion in limine (def.) - CORRECT ANSWER-A ruling on evidence before trial
Rule 103 - Rulings on Evidence: *(a) Preserving a Claim of Error* - CORRECT
ANSWER-A party may claim error in a ruling to admit or exclude evidence only if the
error affects a substantial right of the party and:
(1) if the ruling admits evidence, a party, on the record:
(A) timely objects or moves to strike; and
(B) states the specific ground, unless it was apparent from the context; or
(2) if the ruling excludes evidence, a party informs the court of its substance by an offer
of proof, unless the substance was apparent from the context.
United States v. Walton (7th Cir. 2000)
Reviewing the trial judge's ruling on the admissibility of evidence under the *abuse of
discretion standard.* - CORRECT ANSWER-The trial judge is afforded great deference
because of the first-hand exposure to the witnesses, to the evidence as a whole, and
because of the judge's familiarity with the case and ability to gauge the evidentiary
impact.
Bandera v. City of Quincy (1st Cir. 2003)
*Facts*: π made a claim against the city for sexual harassment and was awarded $135k
in punitive damages. The city appealed because at trial a witness (Coletta) was allowed
to testify not only to her own experiences, but also the impact of what the π reported.
The city did not object. - CORRECT ANSWER-*Holding*: An objection, if its basis is not
obvious, is not preserved unless the ground is stated. (FRE 103(a)(1))
The failure to preserve the objection means review is at most for plain error (FRE
103(d))
Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses - CORRECT ANSWER-If a witness is
not testifying as an expert, testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to one that is:
(a) rationally based on the witness's perception;
,(b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness's testimony or to determining a fact in
issue; and
(c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of
Rule 702.
Chapter 2: Relevance - CORRECT ANSWER-Rule 401 - test for relevant evidence
Rule 402 - General admissibility of Relevant evidence
Rule 403 - Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time or,
Other Reasons
Rule 401 - test for relevant evidence - CORRECT ANSWER-Evidence is relevant if:
(a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without
the evidence; and
(b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.
Rule 402 - General admissibility of Relevant evidence - CORRECT ANSWER-Relevant
evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise:
• the United States Constitution;
• a federal statute;
• these rules; or
• other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court.
Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.
*Rule 403* - Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time or,
Other Reasons - CORRECT ANSWER-The court may exclude relevant evidence if its
probative value is *substantially outweighed* by a danger of one or more of the
following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay,
wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
Most common rule invoked to keep relevant evidence from the jury.
Relevance and Irrelevance - CORRECT ANSWER-1) All irrelevant evidence should be
excluded
2) All relevant evidence should be admitted. (with exceptions)
United States v. Dominguez (1st Cir. 1990)
,*Facts*: Dominguez was found guilty kidnapping, robbing, and murdering Mitri when he
attempted to cross the border. Evidence showed it was a gunshot that killed Mitri. The ∆
objected to the relevance of evidence showing he had a gun, and that he tried to
replace the barrel. - CORRECT ANSWER-*Reasoning*: The fact that Dominguez
owned a gun makes his guilt somewhat more probable than if he did not own a gun.
*FRE 401* - Test for Relevancy: evidence having any tendency to make the existence
of any fact that is of consequence...more probable or less probable than it would be
without evidence.
State v. Larson (Mont.1992)
*Facts*: The ∆ allowed a five-year-old girl to ride behind him on a horse when the horse
reared back and fatally crushed the girl. The ∆ is appealing the introduction of the ∆'s
blood alcohol level during the incident as well as the State's comparison to the level
determined to impair one's ability to drive a moto vehicle. - CORRECT ANSWER-
*Holding*: The ∆'s blood alcohol level was relevant and the comparison of his blood
alcohol to the amount determined to impair someone's ability to drive was relevant.
*Reasoning*: The evidence showed that alcohol had impaired his reactions and
judgments and it helped the jury evaluate his level of intoxication.
FRE 401 - Test for Relevancy
Test of Relevance - CORRECT ANSWER-whether an item of evidence will have any
value, as determined by logic and experience, in proving the proposition for which it is
offered.
*Probative Value and Prejudice (Rule 403)* - CORRECT ANSWER-
United States v. Noriega (11th Cir. 1997)
*Facts*: The ∆ was found guilty of drug related charges after he was accused of helping
Columbian drug traffickers smuggle drugs into the U.S. The ∆ objected to the Court's
decision that disclosing his alleged task performed for the United States were irrelevant
to his defense. - CORRECT ANSWER-*Holding*: The court did not abuse its discretion
when it determined the probative value of the proffered material was outweighed by the
confusion of issues its admission would have caused.
- The evidence potentially had value, but it was marginal.
*Opposing Argument* If ∆ could prove by disclosing specific task that the government
paid him 10,000,000,it would be evidence of where his accumulative wealth came from,
NOT from selling drugs.
, FRE 403: Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of time or other
reasons: - CORRECT ANSWER-The court may exclude relevant evidence if its
probative value is *substantially outweighed* by a danger of one or more of the
following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay,
wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence
United States v. Flintcraft (5th Cir. 1986)
*Facts*: Robert W. Flitcraft and his wife Rebecca appeal their convictions for failing to
file tax returns and filing false withholding exemption certificates under 26 U.S.C. §§
7203 and 7205, both misdemeanors.
*Issue*: Whether the district court abused its discretion by excluding cases and other
documents that Flintcraft claimed to have relied on in concluding that he was not
required to file an income tax return - CORRECT ANSWER-*Holding*: The introduction
of the documents themselves would have had little further probative value. In addition,
the documents presented a danger of confusing the jury by suggesting the law is
unsettled and that it should resolve such a doubtful question of law.
*Opposing Argument* - The ∆'s defense was to try to prove that the documents relied
on are confusing as a matter of fact, not as an attempt to confuse the issues.
*Facts*: McRae (defendant) killed his wife with his hunting rifle on a military reservation.
McRae admitted to the killing but claimed that it was accidental. The United States
(plaintiff) charged McRae with murder. At trial, the district court permitted introduction of
photographs of the crime scene. The photographs depicted the victim in the chair in
which she was killed. The victim was very bloody, and the photographs showed the hole
in her head left by the bullet. The district court found that given McRae's defense of
accident, the photographs were very probative as to the establishment of the victim's
and McRae's positioning when the gun went off. A jury convicted McRae, and he
appealed, arguing that the district court abused its discretion by declining to exclude the
photographs as unfairly prejudicial under Federal Rule of Evidence 403. - CORRECT
ANSWER-*Holding*: Affirmed; It is not designed to permit the court to "even out" the
weight of the evidence, to mitigate a crime, or to make a contest where there is little or
none. Here was no parade of horrors. We refuse to interfere with the trial court's
exercise of its discretion.
*Reasoning*: Relevant evidence is inherently prejudicial; but it is only unfair prejudice,
*substantially outweighing probative value*, which permits exclusion of relevant matter
under 403.
- Parties are not required to stipulate
Unfairly Prejudice - CORRECT ANSWER-1) the jury will attach undue significance to
the evidence or 2) they'll use it for an impermissible purpose
