Understanding Evidence Admissibility Rules in Legal Proceedings, Exams of Nursing

Download Understanding Evidence Admissibility Rules in Legal Proceedings and more Exams Nursing in PDF only on Docsity!

Federal Rules of Evidence Midterm Exam

with Complete Questions and Answers

Rule 101: Scope; Definitions - Correct Answers (a) Scope: These rules apply to proceedings in the United States courts. The specific courts and proceedings to which the rules apply, along with exceptions, are set out in Rule 1101. Explanation: The Federal Rules of Evidence apply in the federal proceedings described in the rule. They also have been copied in a large majority of states, with some variation among states in specific provisions. (b) Definitions: In these rules: (1) "civil case" means a civil action or proceeding; (2) "criminal case" includes a criminal proceeding; (3) "public office" includes a public agency; (4) "record" includes a memorandum, report, or data compilation; (5) a "rule prescribed by the Supreme Court" means a rule adopted by the Supreme Court under statutory authority; and (6) a reference to any kind of written material or any other medium includes electronically stored information. Rule 102: Purpose - Correct Answers These rules should be construed so as to administer every proceeding fairly, eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay, and promote the development of evidence law, to the end of ascertaining the truth and securing a just determination. Explanation: In cases requiring interpretation of these Rules, the United States Supreme Court has generally adopted a "plain meaning" approach and applied a literal analysis. Rule 103: Rulings on Evidence - Correct Answers (a) Preserving a Claim of Error: A party may claim error in a ruling to admit or exclude 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 strikes; 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. Explanation: To preserve an evidentiary issue for appeal, a party must object to the court's ruling. This protects the system against wasteful circumstances in which a party might tolerate an incorrect ruling in the hope of obtaining a favorable trial result, but then seek reversal on the evidentiary ground if the result was unfavorable. The offer of proof

requirement is intended to assist trial courts in making evidentiary rulings, since it guarantees that the trial court will have a clear idea of the offered evidence. (b) Not Needing to Renew an Objection or Offer of Proof: Once the court rules definitively on the record- either before or at trial- a party need not renew an objection or offer of proof to preserve a claim of error for appeal. (c) Court's Statement About the Ruling; Directing an Offer of Proof: The court may make any statement about the character or form of the evidence, the objection made, and the ruling. The court may direct that an offer of proof be made in question-and-answer form. (d) Preventing the Jury from Hearing Inadmissible Evidence: To the extent practicable, the court must conduct a jury trial so that inadmissible evidence is not suggested to the jury by any means. (e) Taking Notice of Plain Error: A court may take notice of a plain error affecting a substantial right, even if the claim of error was not Rule 104: Preliminary Questions - Correct Answers (a) In General: The court must decide any preliminary question about whether a witness is qualified, a privilege exists, or evidence is admissible. In so deciding, the court is not bound by evidence rules, except those on privilege. Explanation: The trial judge, not the jury, decides whether evidence is admissible. For almost every possible objection to admission, the judge rules. There is only one specific type of objection that is left for the jury to rule on, "conditional relevance," described in the next part of this rule. (b) Relevance That Depends on a Fact: When the relevance of evidence depends on whether a fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist. The court may admit the proposed evidence on the condition that the proof be introduced later. Explanation: This is the one type of objection to admissibility that the jury decides itself (and is not, therefore, something ruled on by the judge). If the party seeking to introduce an item of evidence agrees that it is not relevant by itself but states that it will be relevant when some other fact is established that provides a context for it, the situation is defined as "relevancy conditioned on fact." In this situation, the evidence is required to be admitted. The jury will hear it. If the proponent then fails to produce information about the supporting context that is required to make the challenged evidence relevant, the jury can be depended on to notice that the challenged evidence has no relevancy to the case. The jury will thus disregard it easily, since there will be no temptation to use a non-relevant item of evidence in deliberations. (c) Conducting a Hearing So That the Jury Cannot Hear It: The court must conduct any hearing on a preliminary question so that the jury cannot hear it if:

(1) the hearing Rule 105: Limiting Evidence That Is Not Admissible Against Other Parties or for Other Purposes - Correct Answers If the court admits evidence that is admissible against a party or for a purpose- but not against another party or for another purpose- the court, on timely request, must restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly. Explanation: Sometimes there is a legitimate basis for bringing evidence into a trial even though the same evidence would have to be excluded if its proponent sought to have it admitted on another basis. In this situation, a rule could state that the evidence must stay out, but the drafters of the Federal Rules decided that it was better to bring the worthwhile information into the trial, and take the chance that a jury would be able to obey an instruction telling it that certain evidence could influence their deliberations only with respect to a certain party or with respect to a certain issue. Rule 106: Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded Statements - Correct Answers If a party introduces all or part of a writing or recorded statement, an adverse party may require the introduction, at that time, of any other part- or any other writing or recorded statement- that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time. Explanation: When a writing or recording is introduced, any other parts of it or any related statements selected by the opposing party must be admitted if the judge thinks they provide a fair context for understanding the portions already admitted. Rule 401: Test for Relevant Evidence - Correct Answers 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. Explanation: This crucial definition of relevancy sets up a pro-admissibility standard: evidence is relevant if it has any effect on the likelihood that a disputed fact is true. Relevant evidence can make it more likely or less likely that a disputed fact is true, but no piece of evidence will make a fact more and less likely to be true. Rule 402: General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence - Correct Answers Relevant evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise: (a) the United States Constitution; (b) a federal statute; (c) these rules; or (d) other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court. Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.

Explanation: In order to be admitted, evidence must satisfy Rule 401's definition of relevancy. However, some evidence that would satisfy that definition is still excluded, for various reasons of policy. For example, privileges and the rules about character evidence exclude material that meets the definition of relevance. Rule 403: Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of time, or Other Reasons - Correct Answers 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. Explanation: This balancing test allows trial courts to exclude relevant evidence where its admission would harm the judicial process through delay, confusion, or unfair prejudice. All evidence is intended to be prejudicial to the party against which it is introduced (a party ordinarily avoids introducing evidence that is favorable to the opposing side). For prejudicial effect to be significant under this rule, the effect must be one of unfair prejudice. Rule 404: Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes - Correct Answers (a) Character Evidence (1) Prohibited Uses: Evidence of a person's character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait. Explanation: Evidence may not be admitted, generally, if its only relevance is to support an inference that because a person has a certain type of character the person acted in a way typical of that character at a particular time. This is the rule against "propensity" evidence. (2) Exceptions for a Defendant or Victim in a Criminal Case: The following exceptions apply in a criminal case: (A) A defendant may offer evidence of a the defendant's pertinent trait, and if the evidence is admitted, the prosecutor may offer evidence to rebut it; Explanation: Despite the general rule against the propensity inference, a criminal defendant may introduce evidence of "good" character related to the type of offense for which the defendant is being tried. If the defendant takes advantage of this opportunity, the prosecution is entitled to introduce opposing character evidence. If the defendant takes advantage of a different opportunity to offer character evidence, the provision in Rule 404(a)(2) about character evidence concerning an alleged victim, then the prosecution may offer similar character evidence about the defendant. (B) Subject to the limitations in Rule 412, a defendant may offer evidence of an alleged victim's pertinent trait, and if the evidence is admitted, the prosecution may: (i) Offer evidence to rebut it; and

(ii) Offer evidence of the defendant's same trait; and (C) In a homicide case, the prosecutor may offer evidence of the alleged victim's trait of peacefulness to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor. Explanation: To establish the defense of self-defense in criminal cas Rule 405: Methods of Proving Character - Correct Answers (a) By Reputation or Opinion: When evidence of a person's character or character trait is admissible, it may be proved by testimony about the person's reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination of the character witness, the court may allow an inquiry into relevant specific instances of a person's conduct. Explanation: Character evidence requires a two-step analysis. The first step, treated in Rule 404, is determining whether any information related to character is allowed to be introduced. The second step, treated in this rule is determining how that character information may be proved. In every situation where character information is admissible, it may be shown with opinion or reputation testimony. Information about specific past acts relevant to establishing a person's character may be asked about on cross- examination. (b) By Specific Instances of Conduct: When a person's character or character trait is an essential element of a charge, claim or defense, the character or trait may also be proved by relevant specific instances of the person's conduct. Explanation: Information about specific things a person has done can support conclusions about that person's character. Proof of this type of information about character is permitted only when character itself is an issue required to be resolved in a case, as it may be in defamation or negligent entrustment cases or cases where a criminal defendant seeks to establish entrapment. Rule 406: Habit; Routine Practice - Correct Answers Evidence of a person's habit or an organization's routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice. The court may admit this evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness. Explanation: A habit or custom is a routine way of doing something that a person or organization accomplishes in a uniform way, free from individual thought or judgment about how to do it. Proof that a person has a habit is admissible, since it is different from proof that a person has a particular character trait. For example, always parking in a certain space in an office building's parking lot would be treated as a habit, while always driving carefully would be treated as a character trait.

Rule 410: Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements - Correct Answers (a) Prohibited Uses: In a civil or criminal case, evidence of the following is not admissible against the defendant who made the plea or participated in the plea discussions: (1) A guilty plea that was later withdrawn; (2) A nolo contendere plea; (3) A statement made during a proceeding on either of those pleas under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 or a comparable state procedure; or (4) A statement made during plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority if the discussions did not result in a guilty plea or they resulted in a later- withdrawn guilty plea. (b) Exceptions: The court may admit a statement described in Rule 410(a)(3) or (4): (1) In any proceeding in which another statement made during the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced, if in fairness the statements ought to be considered together; or (2) In a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement, if the defendant made the statement under oath, on the record, and with counsel present. Explanation: Certain pleas and plea bargaining statements are inadmissible except to provide a full context for partial revelation of plea bargaining statements or where a case involves perjury. Rule 412: Sex Offense Cases: The Victim's Sexual Behavior or Predisposition - Correct Answers (a) Prohibited Uses: The following evidence is not admissible in a civil or criminal proceeding involving alleged sexual misconduct: (1) Evidence offered to prove that a victim engaged in other sexual behavior; or (2) Evidence offered to prove a victim's sexual predisposition. Explanation: This rule is sometimes called the "rape shield" provision, but it applies to all types of sexual misconduct cases. Evidence about a person's past sexual conduct and sexual traits may not be admitted to show how he or she acted in a situation that is the basis for a sex offense charge. (b) Exceptions: (1) Criminal Cases: The court may admit the following evidence in a criminal cases: (A) Evidence of specific instances of a victim's sexual behavior, if offered to prove that someone other than the defendant was the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence. (B) Evidence of specific instances of a victim's sexual behavior with respect to the person accused of the sexual misconduct, if offered by the defendant to prove consent or if offered by the prosecutor; and

(C) Evidence whose exclusion would violate the defendant's constitutional rights. Explanation: In criminal cases, the rule's general prohibition does not apply to evidence of the alleged victim's sexual behavior that (a) supports a claim that someone other than the defendant was the source of semen or other physical evidence, (b) occurred with the defendant and supports a claim of consent or (c) is so crucial that exclusion would be unconstitutional. (2) Civil Cases: In a civil case, the court may admit evidence offered to prove a victim's sexual behavior or sexual predisposition if its probative value substantially outweighs the danger of harm to any victim and of unfair prejudice to any party. The court may admit evidence of a victim's reputation onl Rule 413: Similar Crimes and Sexual-Assault Cases - Correct Answers (a) Permitted Uses: In a criminal case in which a defendant is accused of a sexual assault, the court may admit evidence that the defendant committed any other sexual assault. The evidence may be considered on any matter to which it is relevant. Explanation: Evidence of a defendant's past sexual offense is admissible to support an inference that his or her commission of such an act in the past increases the likelihood that he or she committed the charged offense. (b) Disclosure to the Defendant: If the prosecutor intends to offer this evidence, the prosecutor must disclose it to the defendant, including witnesses' statements or a summary of the expected testimony. The prosecutor must do so at least 15 days before trial or at a later time that the court allows for good cause. Explanation: Because evidence of past sexual offenses is so prejudicial, a notice provision requires that the defendant have warning prior to its introduction. (c) Effect on Other Rules: This rule does not limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other rule. (d) Definition of "Sexual Assault": In this rule and Rule 415, "sexual assault" means a crime under federal law or under state law involving: (1) Any conduct prohibited by 18 U.S.C. Chapter 109A (2) Contact, without consent, between any part of the defendant's body- or an object- and another person's genitals or anus; (3) Contact, without consent, between the defendant's genitals or anus and any part of another person's body; (4) Deriving sexual pleasure or gratification from inflicting death, bodily injury, or physical pain on another person; or (5) An attempt or conspiracy to engage in conduct described in subparagraphs (1)-(4).

Rule 414: Similar Crimes in Child-Molestation Cases - Correct Answers (a) Permitted Uses: In a criminal case in which a defendant is accused of child molestation, the court may admit evidence that the defendant committed any other child molestation. The evidence may be considered on any matter to which it is relevant. Explanation: Evidence of a defendant's past sexual offense is admissible to support an inference that his or her commission of such an act in the past increases the likelihood that he or she committed the charged offense. This rule is parallel to Rule 413, except that it deals with child molestation cases rather than "sexual assault" cases. (b) Disclosure to the Defendant: If the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence, the prosecutor must disclose it to the defendant, including witnesses' statements or a summary of the expected testimony. The prosecutor must do so at least 15 days before trial or at a later time that the court allows for good cause. (c) Effect on Other Rules: This rule does not limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other rule. (d) Definition of "Child" and "Child Molestation": In this rule and Rule 415: (1) "Child" means a person below the age of 14; and (2) "Child molestation" means a crime under federal law or under state law involving: (A) Any conduct prohibited by 18 U.S.C. chapter 109A and committed with a child; (B) Any conduct prohibited by 18 U.S.C. chapter 110; (C) Contact between any part of the defendant's body- or an object- and a child's genitals or anus; (D) Contact between the defendant's genitals or anus and any part of a child's body; (E) Deriving sexual pleasure or gratification from inflicting death, bodily injury, or physical pain on a child; or (F) An attempt or conspiracy to engage in conduct described in subparagraphs (A)-(E) Rule 415: Similar Acts in Civil Cases Involving Sexual Assault or Child Molestation - Correct Answers (a) Permitted Uses: In a civil case involving a claim for relief based on a party's alleged sexual assault or child molestation, the court may admit evidence that the party committed any other sexual assault or child molestation. The evidence may be considered as provided in Rules 413 and 414. Explanation: This is the only provision in the Federal Rules that allows character evidence to be introduced in a civil case as relevant to the issue of someone's out-of- court conduct. It allows introduction of evidence of a party's past sexual offense or child molestation to support an inference that his or her commission of such an act in the past increases the likelihood that he or she committed the conduct charged in the civil suit. (b) Disclosure to the Opponent: If a party intends to offer this evidence, the party must disclose it to the party against whom it will be offered, including witnesses' statements

or a summary of the expected testimony. The party must do so at least 15 days before trial or at a later time that the court allows for good cause. (c) Effect on Other Rules: This rule does not limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other rule. Rule 601: Competency to Testify in General - Correct Answers Every person is competent to be a witness unless these rules provide otherwise. But in a civil case, state law governs the witness's competency regarding a claim or defense for which state law supplies the rule of decision. Explanation: In contrast to the common law, virtually all people are competent as witnesses, under the federal rules. Where state law governs a claim, state competency law applies. Rule 602: Need for Personal Knowledge - Correct Answers A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may consist of the witness's own testimony. This rule does not apply to a witness's expert testimony under Rule 703. Explanation: If someone testifies as a law, not an expert, witness, evidence must be introduced that could support a jury finding that the witness has direct knowledge of the subject of his or her testimony. That evidence may be introduced as part of the witness's own testimony. Rule 603: Oath or Affirmation - Correct Answers Before testifying, a witness must give an oath or affirmation to testify truthfully. It must be in a form designed to impress that duty on the witness's conscience. Explanation: The requirement of an oath or affirmation to tell the truth must be understood in the context of Rule 610 which prohibits references to religion if relevant only to attack or bolster a witness's credibility. Rule 604: Interpreter - Correct Answers An interpreter must be qualified and must give an oath or affirmation to make a true translation. Rule 605: Judge's Competency as a Witness - Correct Answers The presiding judge may not testify as a witness at the trial. A party need not object to preserve the issue. Explanation: A judge may not testify at a trial over which he or she presides. The rule protects a litigant from the futile effort of asking a judge who violates this rule to sustain an objection to his or her testimony.

Rule 606: Juror's Competency as a Witness - Correct Answers (a) At the Trial: A juror may not testify as a witness before the other jurors at the trial. If a juror is called to testify, the court must give a party an opportunity to object outside the jury's presence. Explanation: A juror cannot testify in a case he or she will be deciding. In contrast to the provision related to judges as witnesses (Rule 605), an objection is required to be made, but it can be made without the jury's knowledge. (b) During an Inquiry into the Validity of a Verdict or Indictment (1) Prohibited testimony or other evidence: During an inquiry into the validity of a verdict or indictment, a juror may not testify about any statement made or incident that occurred during the jury's deliberations; the effect of anything on that juror's or another juror's vote; or any juror's mental processes concerning the verdict or indictment. The court may not receive a juror's affidavit or evidence of a juror's statement on these matters. (2) Exceptions: A juror may testify about whether: (A) Extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury's attention; (B) An outside influence was improperly brought to bear on any juror; or (C) A mistake was made in entering the verdict on the verdict form. Explanation: Jurors may not testify nor may affidavits from jurors be accepted on the subject of any juror's mental processes, statements, or anything else concerning how the jury reached its conclusion, except that testimony and affidavits are allowed about extraneous prejudicial information, outside influences, and mistakes on the verdict form. Rule 607: Who May Impeach a Witness - Correct Answers Any party, including the party that called the witness, may attack the witness's credibility. Explanation: This rejects the common law requirement that an offering party vouch for the honesty of its witness. All parties may impeach all witnesses. Rule 608: A Witness's Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness - Correct Answers (a) Reputation or Opinion Evidence: A witness's credibility may be attacked or supported by testimony about the witness's reputation for having a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the form of an opinion about that character. But the evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the witness's character for truthfulness has been attacked. Explanation: Opinion and reputation evidence may always be introduced to detract from the credibility of any witness. These types of evidence may also be introduced to support the credibility of any witness whose credibility has been attacked in any way. (b) Specific Instances of Conduct: Except for a criminal conviction under Rule 609, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to prove specific instances of a witness's conduct in

order to attack or support the witness's character for truthfulness. But the court may, on cross-examination, allow them to be inquired into if they are probative of the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of: (1) The witness; or (2) Another witness whose character the witness being cross-examined has testified about. By testifying on another matter, a witness does not waive any privilege against self- incrimination for testimony that relates only to the witness's character for truthfulness. Explanation: Past conduct of a witness, relevant to the character trait of truthfulness, may be asked about in cross-examination of the witness or in cross-examination of another witness who has testified in support of the witness's credibility. The past conduct may only be the subject of extrinsic proof if it is a crime for which the witness was convicted or if it is relevant in some way other than to show the witness's character with regard to truthfulness. Rule 609: Impeachment by Evidence of a Criminal Conviction - Correct Answers (a) In General: The following rules apply to attacking a witness's character for truthfulness by evidence of a criminal conviction: (1) For a crime that, in the convicting jurisdiction, was punishable by death or by imprisonment for more than one year, the evidence: (A) Must be admitted, subject to Rule 403, in a civil case or in a criminal case in which the witness is not a defendant; and (B) Must be admitted in a criminal case in which the witness is a defendant, if the probative value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to that defendant; and Explanation: If a witness other than a criminal defendant has been convicted of a felony, evidence of the conviction shall be admitted unless its probative value on the topic of the witness's credibility is substantially outweighed by the risk of prejudicial effect on the defendant. If a witness is a criminal defendant, such evidence shall be admitted only if its probative value outweighs in any degree the risk of prejudice. (2) For any crime regardless of the punishment, the evidence must be admitted if the court can readily determine that establishing the elements of the crime required proving- or the witness admitting- a dishonest act or false statement. Explanation: If any witness has been convicted of a crime involving dishonesty or false statements, such as perjury, evidence of the conviction shall be admitted with no balancing of probative and prejudicial impact.

(b) Limit on Using the Evidence After Ten Years: This subdivision (b) applies if more than ten years have passed since the witness's conviction or release from confinement for it, whichever is later. Evidence of the conviction is admissible only if: (1) Its probative value, supported by specific facts and circumstances, substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect; and (2) The propone Rule 610: Religious Beliefs or Opinions - Correct Answers Evidence of a witness's religious beliefs or opinions is not admissible to attack or support the witness's credibility. Explanation: A witness's religious beliefs or views may not be the subject of evidence introduced as relevant to credibility. This rule relates to Rule 603 that allows a witness to swear or affirm to tell the truth. Rule 611: Mode and Order of Examining Witnesses and Presenting Evidence - Correct Answers (a) Control by the Court; Purposes: The court should exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of examining witnesses and presenting evidence so as to: (1) Make those procedures effective for determining the truth (2) Avoid wasting time; and (3) Protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment. Explanation: The judge controls the order and style of testimony. (b) Scope of Cross-Examination: Cross-examination should not go beyond the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the witness's credibility. The court may allow inquiry into additional matters as if on direct examination. Explanation: Cross-examination may cover only the topics raised in direct examination, unless the judge allows a broader scope. (c) Leading Questions: Leading questions should not be used on direct examination except as necessary to develop the witness's testimony. Ordinarily, the court should allow leading questions: (1) On cross-examination; and (2) When a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party Explanation: Leading questions are allowed on cross-examination and in examining an opposing party or a hostile witness. In direct examination of a party's own witness, they are only allowed "to develop" the testimony.

Rule 612: Writing Used to Refresh a Witness's Memory - Correct Answers (a) Scope: This rule gives an adverse party certain options when a witness uses a writing to refresh memory: (1) While testifying; or (2) Before testifying, if the court decides that justice requires the party to have those options. (b) Adverse Party's Opinions; Deleting Unrelated Matter: Unless 18 U.S.C. 3500 provides otherwise in a criminal case, an adverse party is entitled to have the writing produced at the hearing, to inspect it, to cross-examine the witness about it, and to introduce in evidence any portion that relates to the witness's testimony. If the producing party claims that the writing includes unrelated matter, the court must examine the writing in camera, delete any unrelated portion, and order that the rest be delivered to the adverse party. Any portion deleted over objection must be preserved for the record. (c) Failure to Produce or Deliver the Writing: If a writing is not produced or is not delivered as ordered, the court may issue any appropriate order. But if the prosecution does not comply in a criminal case, the court must strike the witness's testimony or- if justice so requires- declare a mistrial. Explanation: When a witness uses a document to refresh his or her recollection and then testifies from "present recollection refreshed," the opposing party is entitled to see the document, cross-examine the witness about it, and introduce parts of it that are relevant to the testimony. Rule 613: Witness's Prior Statement - Correct Answers (a) Showing or Disclosing the Statement During Examination: When examining a witness about the witness's prior statement, a party need not show it or disclose its contents to the witness. But the party must, on request, show it or disclose its contents to an adverse party's attorney. Explanation: A common impeachment technique is to show that something a witness said or wrote before the trial conflicted with the witness's testimony at trial. This rule allows a questioner to use this technique without being required to produce the document or describe the statement in advance. (b) Extrinsic Evidence of a Prior Inconsistent Statement: Extrinsic evidence of a witness's prior inconsistent statement is admissible only if the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement and an adverse party is given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement and an adverse party is give an opportunity to examine the witness about it, or if justice so requires. This subdivision (b) does not apply to any opposing party's statement under Rule 801(d)(2). Explanation: Ordinarily, if a party wants to introduce a witness's past statement, rather than just ask the witness about it, the witness must be given an opportunity to comment

specifically on the past statement,and the opposing party must also have an opportunity to question the witness about it. Rule 614: Court's Calling or Examining a Witness - Correct Answers (a) Calling: The court may call a witness on its own or at a party's request. Each party is entitled to cross-examine the witness. (b) Examining: The court may examine a witness regardless of who calls the witness. (c) Objections: A party may object to the court's calling or examining a witness either at that time or at the next opportunity when the jury is not present. Rule 615: Excluding Witnesses - Correct Answers At a party's request, the court must order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear other witnesses' testimony. Or the court may do so on its own. But this rule does not authorize excluding: (a) A party who is a natural person; (b) An officer or employee of a party that is not a natural person, after being designated as the party's representative by its attorney; (c) A person whose presence a party shows to be essential to presenting the party's claim or defense; or (d) A person authorized by statute to be present. Explanation: Someone who is a witness may be excluded from the courtroom, so that he or she cannot hear testimony of other witnesses. Witnesses who are exempt from this treatment are people who are parties themselves or are designated representatives of entities like corporations. Also exempt is anyone a lawyer in a case persuades the court is essential as an assistant to the lawyer. Rule 901: Authenticating or Identifying - Correct Answers (a) In General: To satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is. Explanation: When a party seeks to introduce a document of any object or thing, the party must also provide a basis for a finding that the document or object really is what the proponent claims it is. This requirement also applies to testimony about conversations. It is important to remember that authentication is only one requirement that must be satisfied for admission of an item of evidence. For example, an authenticated document may still need to satisfy the rules concerning hearsay and original writings. (b) Examples: The following are examples only- not a complete list- of evidence that satisfies the requirement:

Explanation: It is extremely easy to satisfy the authentication requirement. The examples provided in this part of the rule are typical methods litigants use, but any proof that could support the required finding is allowed. (1) Testimony of a Witness with Knowledge: Testimony that an item is what it is claimed to be. (2) Non-expert Opinion About Handwriting: A non-expert's opinion that handwriting is genuine, based on familiarity with it that was not acquired for the current litigation. (3) Comparison by an Expert Witness or the Trier of Fact: A comparison with an authenticated specimen by an expert witness or the trier of fact. Explanation: The specimen with which the trier of fact compares the item sought to be authenticated must itself be authenticated. The specimen can satisfy that requirement in a variety of ways, such as circumstantial evidence or through testimony by a witness who can state that the specimen is what it is claimed to be. (4) Distinctive Characteristics and the Rule 902: Self-Authentication - Correct Answers The following items of evidence are self-authenticating; they require no extrinsic evidence of authenticity in order to be admitted: Explanation: The items described in this rule's examples are considered so likely to be what they seem to be that further proof is not required. (1) Domestic public documents that are sealed and signed: A document that bears (A) A seal purporting to be that of the United States; any state, district, commonwealth, territory, or insular possession of the United States; the former Panama Canal Zone; the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; a political subdivision of any of these amenities; or a department, agency, or officer of any entity named above; and (B) A signature purporting to be an execution or attestation (2) Domestic Public Documents that are not sealed but are signed and certified: a document that bears no seal if: (A) It bears the signature of an officer or employee of an entity named in Rule 902(1) (A); and (B) Another public officer who has a seal and official duties within that same entity certifies under seal- or its equivalent- that the signer has the official capacity and that the signature is genuine. (3) Foreign Public Documents: A document that purports to be signed or attested by a person who is authorized by a foreign country's law to do so. The document must be accompanied by a final certification that certifies the genuineness of the signature and official position of the signer or attester- or of any foreign official whose certificate of genuineness relates to the signature or attestation or is in a chain of certificates of genuineness relating to the signature or attestation. The certification may be made by a secretary of a United States embassy or legation; by a counsel general, vice consul, or consular agent of the United States; or by a diplomatic o

Rule 903: Subscribing Witness's Testimony Unnecessary - Correct Answers A subscribing witness's testimony is necessary to authenticate a writing only if required by the law of the jurisdiction that governs its validity. Rule 1001: Definitions That Apply to This Article - Correct Answers In this article: (a) A "writing" consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent set down in any form. (b) A "recording" consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent recorded in any manner. (c) A "photograph" means a photographic image or its equivalent stored in any form. (d) An "original" of a writing or recording means the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by the person who executed or issued it. For electronically stored information, "original" means any printout- or other output readable by sight- if it accurately reflects the information. An "original" of a photograph includes the negative or a print from it. (e) A "duplicate" means a counterpart produced by a mechanical, photographic, chemical, electronic, or other equivalent process or technique that accurately reproduces the original. Explanation: These definitions are used to establish the Federal Rules' version of the "best evidence" rule. The rule applies only to items defined as writings,recordings, or photographs. It does not require "best" evidence of their contents, but rather sets up a specific requirement about production of originals rather than copies. Rule 1002: Requirement of Original - Correct Answers An original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a federal statute provides otherwise. Explanation: The requirement of the original applies only when the proponent seeks to prove the contents of the writing, recording, or photograph. A party may provide evidence of a fact without regard to the original writing rule if the proof does not depend on a showing that a writing, recording, or photograph shows that the fact is true. If a party's technique for establishing a fact is to demonstrate that a writing, recording, or a photograph contains evidence of the fact, then the rule applies. As the next portions of the rule show, the requirement of producing the original, a copy, or an excuse for having neither the original nor a copy. Rule 1003: Admissibility of Duplicates - Correct Answers A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original's authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate. Explanation: Despite the existence of this original writing rule, a duplicate is almost always as acceptable as the ostensibly required original. Rule 1004: Admissibility of Other Evidence of Content - Correct Answers An original is not required and other evidence of the content of a writing, recording, or photograph is admissible if:

Explanation: In the situations described in the following portions of this rule, testimony about the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph is permitted even without the introduction of either the original or a copy of the item. (a) All the originals are lost or destroyed, and not by the proponent acting in bad faith; (b) An original cannot be obtained by any available judicial process; (c) The party against whom the original would be offered had control of the original; was at that time put on notice, by pleadings or otherwise, that the original would be a subject of proof at the trial or hearing; and fails to produce it at the trial or hearing; or (d) The writing, recording, or photograph is not closely related to a controlling issue. Rule 1005: Copies of Public Records to Prove Content - Correct Answers The proponent may use a copy to prove the content of an official record- or of a document that was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law- if these conditions are met: the record or document is otherwise admissible; and the copy is certified as correct in accordance with Rule 902(4) or is testified to be correct by a witness who has compared it with the original. If no such copy can be obtained by reasonable diligence, then the proponent may use other evidence to prove the content. Rule 1006: Summaries to Prove Content - Correct Answers The proponent may use a summary, chart, or calculation to prove the content of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot be conveniently examined in court. The proponent must make the originals or duplicates available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place. And the court may order the proponent to produce them in court. Rule 1007: Testimony or Statement of a Party to Prove Content - Correct Answers The proponent may prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph by the testimony, deposition, or written statement of the party against whom the evidence is offered. The proponent need not account for the original. Explanation: If a party against whom information about the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph is sought to be introduced gives testimony about the contents, the original writing rule does not apply. Rule 1008: Functions of Court and Jury - Correct Answers Ordinarily, the court determines whether the proponent has fulfilled the factual conditions for admitting other evidence of the content of a writing, recording, or photograph under Rule 1004 or 1005. But in a jury trial, the jury determines- in accordance with Rule 104(b)- any issue about whether: (a) An asserted writing, recording, or photograph ever existed; (b) Another one produced at the trial or hearing is the original; or (c) Other evidence of content accurately reflects the content. Explanation: Where questions of fact are involved in deciding whether Rule 1004's provisions about other evidence of the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph may be admitted, the trial judge decides most of the questions, as Rule 104(a) would require. Certain specified issues related to the rule are left to the jury, however. They

are whether a particular writing ever existed, whether an item at trial is an original, and whether other evidence of contents is accurate.