Evidence Flashcards

At trial, the plaintiff's attorney asks a defense witness: 'Isn't it true you were disciplined at work for falsifying records?' The witness denies it. Plaintiff's counsel then offers extrinsic evidence of the disciplinary action. The court should:

Answer: Exclude the extrinsic evidence under the collateral matter rule, because specific instances of misconduct on cross-examination are generally limited to the answer given

Under the collateral matter rule, when specific instances of misconduct are used for impeachment, the questioner is generally bound by the witness's denial and cannot introduce extrinsic evidence to contradict it.

A party seeks to have a handwritten letter authenticated. The proponent offers testimony from a lay witness who says she recognizes the handwriting from seeing the author write on multiple prior occasions. Under CEC § 1416, this authentication is:

Answer: Sufficient because a lay witness with personal familiarity with the handwriting may authenticate it

Under CEC § 1416, a lay witness who has personal familiarity with another person's handwriting from prior non-litigation observations may authenticate a document by that person.

In a criminal case, the prosecution seeks to introduce a non-testifying co-defendant's confession that implicates the defendant. The court should:

Answer: Exclude or redact the confession to remove references to the defendant, consistent with Bruton v. United States

Under Bruton v. United States, admitting a non-testifying co-defendant's confession that directly incriminates the defendant violates the Confrontation Clause; the statement must be excluded or redacted.

The defendant in a criminal case seeks to exclude evidence on the grounds that it was obtained through an unlawful search and seizure. In California, the defendant may seek exclusion under:

Answer: Both the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule and California Proposition 8 (Victim's Bill of Rights), which limits state exclusionary rule claims to federal constitutional violations

After Proposition 8 (1982), California's independent state exclusionary rule was eliminated; suppression claims in California criminal cases are now limited to federal constitutional violations under the Fourth Amendment.

A witness is unavailable at trial. The proponent seeks to admit the witness's deposition testimony from an earlier civil proceeding involving different parties and a different subject matter. Under CEC § 1292, this testimony is:

Answer: Admissible if the party against whom it is offered had an opportunity and similar motive to examine the witness at the prior proceeding

Under CEC § 1292, former testimony from a prior proceeding is admissible when the witness is unavailable, provided the party against whom it is offered had an opportunity and similar motive to cross-examine the witness at the prior proceeding.

Counsel calls an expert who testifies that in her opinion the defendant's blood alcohol level exceeded the legal limit. On cross-examination, opposing counsel asks the expert to acknowledge a peer-reviewed study contradicting her methodology. Under California law, the court should:

Answer: Permit the questioning because learned treatises and published studies may be used to cross-examine an expert under CEC § 721

Under CEC § 721, an expert witness may be cross-examined regarding statements in published works on the subject recognized as authoritative by the expert or by the court.

A party seeks to introduce evidence of a settlement offer made during mediation to prove liability. The opposing party objects. The court should:

Answer: Exclude the evidence because offers to compromise are inadmissible to prove liability under CEC § 1152

Under CEC § 1152 and § 1119, both settlement offers and all mediation communications are inadmissible to prove liability, with mediation confidentiality providing particularly strong protection.