NV Bar Nevada Evidence Law 1 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Under the Nevada Rules of Evidence, which of the following is the correct standard for admissibility of expert testimony?
- The expert must have specialized knowledge that will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue (Correct answer)
- The expert must be certified by a state licensing board relevant to the subject matter
- The expert must use only methodologies that have been published in peer-reviewed journals
- The expert must have testified as an expert in at least five prior Nevada cases
Correct answer: The expert must have specialized knowledge that will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue
NRS 50.275 (mirroring FRE 702) allows expert testimony when the expert's specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact, without requiring board certification or a specific number of prior appearances.
Question 2: Under Nevada law, which hearsay exception applies to a statement made by a declarant while believing death was imminent, concerning the cause of what the declarant believed to be impending death?
- Present sense impression
- Excited utterance
- Dying declaration (Correct answer)
- Statement against interest
Correct answer: Dying declaration
NRS 51.335 codifies the dying declaration exception, allowing admission of statements made under a sense of impending death about the cause or circumstances of that death.
Question 3: In Nevada, which privilege allows a client to refuse to disclose confidential communications made to an attorney for the purpose of seeking legal advice?
- Work-product doctrine
- Attorney-client privilege (Correct answer)
- Common interest privilege
- Spousal communications privilege
Correct answer: Attorney-client privilege
The attorney-client privilege under NRS 49.095 protects confidential communications between a lawyer and client made for the purpose of obtaining or providing legal advice.
Question 4: Under NRS 48.045 (Nevada's equivalent of FRE 404), evidence of a defendant's prior crimes or bad acts is generally inadmissible to prove character but may be admitted to prove which of the following?
- General propensity to commit crimes
- Motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake (Correct answer)
- That the defendant is likely to reoffend
- Victim's contributory negligence
Correct answer: Motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake
NRS 48.045(2) allows prior acts evidence for non-character purposes such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.
Question 5: Which of the following best describes the best evidence rule as applied in Nevada courts?
- Only the single most probative piece of evidence on any point may be admitted
- To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original is ordinarily required (Correct answer)
- All documentary evidence must be authenticated by a notary public before admission
- Secondary evidence is always inadmissible if the original document exists
Correct answer: To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original is ordinarily required
Nevada's best evidence rule (NRS 52.235–52.285) provides that to prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original is ordinarily required, though exceptions allow duplicates and secondary evidence in certain circumstances.
Question 6: Under Nevada law, a witness's prior inconsistent statement made under oath at a prior proceeding is admissible for which purpose?
- For impeachment purposes only, never as substantive evidence
- As substantive evidence of the facts stated therein, as well as for impeachment (Correct answer)
- Only if the witness is now unavailable to testify
- Only to refresh the witness's recollection
Correct answer: As substantive evidence of the facts stated therein, as well as for impeachment
Under NRS 51.035(2), a prior inconsistent statement made under oath at a prior trial, hearing, or deposition is not hearsay and is admissible as substantive evidence, not merely for impeachment.
Question 7: Nevada's spousal privilege has two components. Which of the following correctly states the confidential marital communications privilege?
- Either spouse may prevent the other from testifying about any matter observed during the marriage
- A spouse may refuse to testify and may prevent the other spouse from testifying about confidential communications made during the marriage (Correct answer)
- Only the testifying spouse may assert the privilege, not the non-testifying spouse
- The privilege applies only to written communications between spouses
Correct answer: A spouse may refuse to testify and may prevent the other spouse from testifying about confidential communications made during the marriage
Under NRS 49.295, the confidential marital communications privilege allows either spouse to prevent disclosure of private communications made during the marriage, and either spouse may assert it.
NV Bar Nevada Evidence Law 1
Under the Nevada Rules of Evidence, which of the following is the correct standard for admissibility of expert testimony?