5/22 Flashcards
(30 cards)
Definition of Relevance
Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make the existence of any fact more or less probable. For evidence to be relevant, it must be (1) material and (2) probative.
All relevant evidence is admissible unless a specific rule applies or the court uses its 403 discretion.
Rule 403
A judge has discretion to exclude relevant evidence if probative value is substantially outweighed by:
(1) unfair prejudice;
(2) confusion;
(3) misleading;
(4) undue delay;
(5) waste of time; or
(6) repetitive.
Evidence of Prior Similar Occurrences
Inadmissible unless-
(1) Plaintiff’s accident history used to show:
- Previous similar false claims; or
- Plaintiff previously injured the same part of their body & injury is not attributable to the current accident.
(2) Defendant’s accident history, is substantially similar circumstances, admissible to show
- Existence of a dangerous condition
- The dangerous condition was a cause of the present injury; or
- The defendant had notice of the dangerous condition.
(3) Absence of similar accidents available to show defendant’s lack of knowledge of the danger.
(4) Previous similar acts admissible to prove intent/motive;
(5) Sales price of similar property (real/personal) admissible to prove value. But offers to purchase are not admissible.
(6) Rebutting a claim of impossibility.
Habit & Business Routine
Admissible as circumstantial evidence that the person (or organization) acted in accordance with the habit on the occasion at issue in the case.
Habit describes a person’s regular response to a specific set of circumstances.
There are 2 defining characteristics of habit: (1) frequent and (2) highly specific. (Different from character evidence, which is a party’s general disposition).
Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Public Policy Grounds
(1) Liability insurance to prove fault or ability to pay.
(2) Subsequent remedial measures to prove fault, defect, or inadequate warning.
(3) Civil settlements & settlement negotiations to prove the validity/amount of disputed claim or impeach a witness by prior inconsistent statement.* A disputed claim must exist to apply.
*Exception: Conduct or statements during compromise negotiations regarding a civil dispute with a governmental regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority are not excluded when offered in a criminal case.
(4) Criminal Plea Bargaining/Statements made in negotiation.
(5) Paying/offers to pay medical expenses inadmissible to prove liability.*
Exception: Admissions of fact accompanying such payments/offers are ADMISSIBLE.
Character Evidence
Evidence of a person’s general propensity or disposition admissible if relevant to a claim/defense or circumstantial evidence of how a person probably acted during the events of the case.
Evidence of a witness’s bad character for truthfulness might be offered for impeachment purposes.
Can be proven by evidence of (1) Specific acts; (2) opinion testimony; and (3) testimony of general reputation in the community.
Defendant’s Character in Criminal Case
Prosecution cannot initiate. But defendant can offer into evidence about their good character, and prosecution can rebut.
Can prove by a character witness testifying for their good reputation for a pertinent trait or their personal opinion concerning that trait. (“Pertinent”=relevant to an element of the crime). But CANNOT testify to specific acts.
Prosecution can (1) cross-exam the defendant’s character witness with questions about specific acts of bad conduct or (2) call its own character witness to testify to bad reputation/opinion testimony.
Victim’s Character in Criminal Cases
Except in sexual assault, a defendant can introduce reputation or opinion evidence of a victim’s bad character.
Prosecution can rebut to offer victim’s good character.
In homicide cases, when defendant pleads self defence, evidence of any kind that the victim was the first aggressor opens the door to evidence that the victim had character for peacefulness.
Character Evidence in Civil Cases
Generally not admissible (for either party) to prove conduct in conformity except when character is an element of a claim/defense (defamation, negligent hiring, custody).
Evidence of Past Crimes/Wrongs to Prove Character
Generally inadmissible to show defendant acted in conformity with it.
Admissible to prove MIMIC:
- Motive
- Intent/state of mind
- Absence of mistake
- Identity
- Common plan/scheme
Must be sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to believe it occurred.
Available in civil & criminal cases.
Subject to 403 consideration. Reasonable pre-trial notice to defendant required in writing for criminal cases.
Similar Misconduct in Sex Crime Cases
Evidence of a defendant’s other acts of sexual assault or child molestation is admissible in criminal or civil case where defendant is accused of committing a similar act.
Prosecution must disclose intent to defendant 15 days before trial.
Self Defense & Homicide
A person may use deadly force in self-defense only if (i) he is without fault, (ii) he is confronted with unlawful force, and (iii) he is threatened with imminent death or great bodily harm.
A person may use deadly force in self-defense even if this could be avoided by retreating.
1st Degree Murder Mens Rea and Actus Reus
Actus Reus - Murder
Mens Rea - Premeditation and deliberation
Co-Conspirator Liability in Felony Murder
Under the majority view, criminal liability for murder cannot be based on the death of a co-felon from resistance by the victim or police pursuit.
Abandonment & Attempt
Once a person has gone beyond preparation, abandonment is not a defense to attempt.
Conspiracy at Common Law
Must be bilateral.
There must be a meeting of at least two “guilty minds”; i.e., between two or more persons who are actually committing themselves to the scheme.
If one person in a two-party conspiracy is an undercover LEO and/or only feigning agreement, the other person cannot be convicted of conspiracy under the common law bilateral approach.
Co-Conspirator Withdraw/Liability
Conspirator may limit his liability for subsequent acts of other conspirators by performing an affirmative act that notifies the other members of the conspiracy in time for the other members to have the opportunity to abandon their plans.
Voluntary Intoxication & Recklessness
A person acts recklessly when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a prohibited result will follow, and this disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of reasonable care.
Although voluntary intoxication is a defense to a crime that requires purpose or knowledge, it is no defense to crimes involving recklessness.
Voluntary intox is only a defense to purposely and knowingly.
“Voluntary Confession” v. Waiving Miranda
Due process requires that for confessions to be admissible, they must be “voluntary,” based on the totality of the circumstances. However, even a voluntary confession will be inadmissible if it was obtained in violation of Miranda rights.
Mistrial Exception to Double Jeopardy
One of the exceptions permitting retrial even if jeopardy has attached is when a mistrial is granted in the first trial at the request of the defendant on any ground not constituting an acquittal on the merits.
Voluntary Manslaughter Imperfect Self Defense
Defendant initiated altercation or defendant unreasonably believed deadly force was necessary
Deadly Force in Self Defense
May be used if (1) defendant not at fault; (2) confronted with imminent unlawful force; and (3) reasonable belief of imminent death or great bodily harm.
Self-defense is available to an initial aggressor if (1) they effectively withdraw before the need for self-defense arises and communicates their desire to do so; or (2) victim of the initial aggression suddenly escalates a minor dispute into a deadly altercation.
Voluntary Intoxication in Ga
Voluntary intoxication is a very limited defense. It is not a defense to any crime unless the defendant can show that the intoxication resulted in more than a temporary alteration of brain function such that the defendant could not form the requisite intent.
Aggravated Assault in Ga
Assault (1) with intent to murder, rape, or rob; (2) with a deadly weapon; (3) with an object, device, or instrument that is likely to or actually does result in strangulation; or (4) by discharging a firearm from within a motor vehicle.
