VT Bar Evidence Flashcards

The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment requires that testimonial hearsay may only be admitted against a criminal defendant when which condition is met?

Answer: The declarant is unavailable AND the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine

Under Crawford v. Washington, testimonial hearsay is inadmissible against a criminal defendant unless the declarant is unavailable and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine.

FRE 407 provides that evidence of subsequent remedial measures is generally inadmissible to prove which of the following?

Answer: Negligence, culpable conduct, or a product defect

FRE 407 bars evidence of subsequent remedial measures to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a product defect, or a need for a warning.

Under FRE 609, a prior felony conviction may be used to impeach a witness's credibility subject to which balancing test if more than 10 years have passed since the conviction?

Answer: Probative value substantially outweighs prejudicial effect

For convictions more than 10 years old, FRE 609(b) requires that the probative value substantially outweigh the prejudicial effect before the conviction may be used for impeachment.

Which hearsay exception permits admission of records of regularly conducted activity (business records)?

Answer: FRE 803(6)

FRE 803(6) is the business records exception, allowing records made in the regular course of business to be admitted despite being hearsay.

Vermont Rule of Evidence 502 (mirroring FRE 502) addresses inadvertent disclosure of which type of privileged information?

Answer: Attorney-client communications and work product

VRE/FRE 502 protects against waiver of attorney-client privilege and work product protection when privileged materials are inadvertently disclosed.

Under FRE 403, relevant evidence may be excluded when its probative value is substantially outweighed by which of the following?

Answer: The danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, waste of time, or needless cumulative evidence

FRE 403 allows exclusion of relevant evidence when its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion, or other listed factors.