Evidence Admissibility In Court

Question * *. In the criminal prosecution of a Defendant for perjury, the Defendant testified that he did not lie under oath. The defense then calls a witness to testify, that in her opinion, the Defendant is a peaceful, non-violent person. This evidence is: o Admissible only to prove the Defendant did not commit the crime. o Admissible only to support Defendant’s credibility. o Admissible both to prove Defendant did not commit the crime and to support Defendant’s credibility. o Inadmissible

Question *.* pts Which of the following is an example of impeaching a witness by asking about a bias? o Sir, the plaintiff is your wife, correct? o Isn’t it true you were recently fired by the defendant? o The plaintiff loaned you a large sum of money, correct? o A and B.

Question *.* pts In the criminal prosecution of the Defendant for murder, the Defendant testifies that she was in another country when the crime took place. The Defendant also calls W1 to the stand to testify that he was with the Defendant at that time. On rebuttal, the prosecution wishes to call W2 to testify that W1 has been the Defendant’s boyfriend for five years. Which of the following statements is most accurate? o W2’s testimony is admissible to impeach W1 by showing that he has a bad character for truthfulness. o W2’s testimony is admissible to impeach W1 by showing that W1 has a reason to testify in the Defendant’s favor. o W2’s testimony is admissible to impeach W1 by contradiction. o W2’s testimony is inadmissible.

Assume that in a certain trial, the D wishes to present evidence that the P claims constitutes inadmissible character evidence. The D’s response is that the evidence is not of a character trait, so it is not character evidence. Assuming that it concerns the evidence at issue, which of the following is a court least likely to treat as testimony that relates to a character trait? o The Plaintiff is a careless driver o The Plaintiff is an alcoholic o The Plaintiff is frugal o The Plaintiff has epilepsy

Question *.* pts In the prosecution of Bryan for burglary of Emily’s home, Emily died before trial. To prove that he didn’t commit the burglary, Bryan calls Marc to the stand to testify that just before Emily died she said, “The end is near. I don’t know if I picked the right guy out of the lineup.” At the lineup, Emily picked Bryan as the perpetrator. The prosecution makes a hearsay objection to Marc’s testimony about Emily’s statement to him. Of the following, which is Bryan’s best argument for admitting Marc’s testimony concerning Emily’s statement? o The statement is not hearsay. o The statement is hearsay but admissible as a declaration against interest. o The statement is hearsay but admissible as a dying declaration. o Although the statement is hearsay and does not fall within an exception, the court must admit it to protect Bryan’s constitutional right to due process and to present a defense.

Question *.* pts In the prosecution of D for the molestation of V, a child, D claims she was not the one who committed the crime. To prove that D molested V, the prosecution offers evidence that several years earlier, D molested another child. Which of the following statements is correct? o The evidence is inadmissible as character evidence. o The evidence is admissible unless the court finds that the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. o The evidence is admissible to prove modus operandi to molest children, and thus prove D’s identity as the perpetrator. o The evidence is admissible regardless of the balance of probative value and unfair prejudice.

Question *.* pts In a medical malpractice case, the plaintiff has sued both the internal medicine doctor and a neurologist. You are defending the neurologist. Plaintiff calls an expert to render opinions in the case. Opinion * is regarding the internist only, and Opinion * is regarding the neurologist only. Opinion * regarding the internist does not help your case. What should you do? o Move to bar the expert from testifying altogether. o Argue that the facts and data are not substantive evidence. o Allow the expert to testify, cross-examine the witness to clarify that part of the opinion does not pertain to your client neurologist, and ask the court for a limiting instruction. o None of the above.

Question *.* pts Defendant is a physical therapist who has been named in a negligence suit. At trial, plaintiff alleges that during therapy, she fell and broke her hip. During cross-examination, plaintiff’s attorney asks the defendant, “Isn’t it true that two years ago, a man sued you after breaking his hip during a therapy session with you?” Defendant objects. Which is the strongest argument? o Defendant: “Objection to the improper use of character evidence under FRE *(B). o Plaintiff: “This evidence is relevant to prove that the defendant has a pattern of this type of behavior.” o Defendant: “Objection, evidence of this type is only relevant in a criminal case.” o Plaintiff: “For public policy reasons, physicians should be held accountable for their actions. Therefore, the objection should be overruled.”

Question *.* pts In a civil action by the P against D for battery during a professional basketball game, D had been cheering for the visiting team when P asked him to “cut it out.” P claims D then punched P. D claims he never touched P. To prove his defense, D calls W to testify that she was with D at another game when D cheered for the visiting team, that a home team fan asked D to stop, and that D just shrugged it off. P objects. Which of the following statements is correct? o The evidence is admissible character evidence. o The evidence is admissible habit evidence. o The evidence is inadmissible because it is offered in the form of specific instances or conduct rather than reputation or opinion. o The evidence is inadmissible because D may not use character evidence to support her defense in this situation.

Question *.* pts In a civil action by the P against D for battery during a professional basketball game, D had been cheering for the visiting team when P asked him to “cut it out.” P claims D then punched P. D claims he never touched P. To prove his defense, D calls W to testify that she was with D at another game when D cheered for the visiting team, that a home team fan asked D to stop, and that D just shrugged it off. P objects. Which of the following statements is correct? o The evidence is admissible character evidence. o The evidence is admissible habit evidence. o The evidence is inadmissible because it is offered in the form of specific instances or conduct rather than reputation or opinion. o The evidence is inadmissible because D may not use character evidence to support her defense in this situation.

Question *.* pts In the criminal prosecution of the Defendant for child molestation, the prosecution calls W1, the *-year-old alleged victim. After establishing W1’s competency to testify, the prosecution asks W1 about the alleged assault. W1 states that he can’t remember what happened. The prosecution then asks W1, “Now, you went to an apartment with the Defendant, didn’t you?” Which of the following statements concerning this question is most accurate? o The question is leading but proper. o The question is not leading and is proper. o The question is leading and improper. o The question is argumentative, compound, and improper.

Question *.* pts In a negligence suit arising from a car accident, defendant asked the plaintiff, “Isn’t it true you’ve been issued five speeding tickets in the past five years? Plaintiff objects. Which is the strongest argument? o Plaintiff: “Objection to the improper use of character evidence under FRE *(B). o Defendant: “This evidence is relevant to prove that because the plaintiff has a history of speeding in the past, it’s more likely he was speeding this time as well, and thus caused this accident.” o Plaintiff: “It is improper to ask the plaintiff about prior crimes, wrongs or other acts; this type of evidence is relevant only to a defendant.” o None of the above.

Question *.* pts In the criminal prosecution of the D for assault and battery, D claims self-defense. During its case-in-chief, to prove D was the aggressor in the fight, the prosecution calls W, who testifies that she has lived in the same community as D for many years, that she is familiar with D’s community reputation for violence or peacefulness, and that D’s reputation is that she is a very violent person, D objects. Which of the following statements is correct? o The court should sustain D’s objection because the evidence is hearsay for which no exception applies. o The court should sustain the objection because this is impermissible character evidence. o The court should overrule the objection because D’s character is in issue. o The court should overrule the objection if the probative value of the evidence substantially outweighs the danger of unfair prejudice.

Question *.* pts In a negligence action by P against D, P claims that D failed to yield the right of way at an intersection and smashed into P. To prove that D failed to yield, P calls W to testify that a number of D’s friends told her that D frequently drives through that intersection and almost always fails to yield. D objects. Which of the following statements is correct? o W’s testimony is inadmissible because character is not admissible in this situation. o W’s testimony is inadmissible because behavior will only constitute a habit if it is repeated invariably. o W’s testimony is inadmissible as hearsay. o W’s testimony is inadmissible as habit evidence.

In a civil action by the Plaintiff against the Defendant arising out of a business dispute, the Plaintiff calls W1 at trial, whose testimony helps to establish Plaintiff’s version of the facts. On cross-examination, the defense wishes to ask W1 if it isn’t true that W1 has sued the Defendant’s spouse in an unrelated matter. W1 denies that this is true. The defense now wishes to call X, the court clerk, to testify that W has indeed filed such an action. Which of the following statements is most accurate? o X’s testimony should not be permitted because the existence of a lawsuit between W and D’s spouse is irrelevant to the present case. o X’s testimony should not be permitted because it would constitute impermissible use of extrinsic evidence (a trial in a trial) to impeach. o X’s testimony should not be permitted because it would constitute improper use of specific instances of the conduct of a witness to impeach the witness’s credibility. o X’s testimony is admissible.

Question *.* pts A negligence action was filed by the plaintiff, Terrell, a third-grader, against his classmate, Mary, arising from a playground collision. To prove that he suffered injury to his arm, Terrell’s father is called to testify that when he took Terrell to the hospital, he told the admitting nurse, “my son’s arm really hurts and he can’t move it.” Which of the following statements is correct? o Terrell’s father’s statement to the nurse is hearsay but admissible as a statement made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment. o Terrell’s father’s statement to the nurse is hearsay but admissible as an excited utterance. o Terrell’s father’s statement is not hearsay because it is not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. o Terrell’s father’s statement is inadmissible hearsay.