Testimony

Question 1

W Competence

Answer 1

Personal Knowledge
Present Recollection
Communication
Sincerity
[CA: Understand legal duty re truth]

Incompetent: Judge, Jury [CA: most W hypnotized pre-trial to refresh]

Question 2

Lay Opinion

Answer 2

1. Rationally based on W perception

2. Helpful to trier of fact (more info than mere perception, not legal conclusions)

Question 3

Expert Opinion

Answer 3

1. Qualified: expertise, specialized knowledge
2. Helpful to trier of fact: expertise to reach conclusion jury could not
3. Reasonable degree of certainty
4. Proper factual basis: personal knowledge, inadmissible E ok if relied on in field
5. Reliable principles reasonably applied

Question 4

Expert Opinion - RPRA

Answer 4

Non-Science: ad-hoc

Science Fed: Daubert/Khumo

• -peer reviewed + published
• -tested + can be re-tested
• -low error rate
• -reasonable level of acceptance

Science CA: Kelley/Frye
–based on principles generally accepted in field

Question 5

Writings with Witnesses

Answer 5

Refresh Recollection: use anything, opponent can inspect and offer into E

Recorded Recollection: hearsay exception to read to jury if (1) W personal knowledge, (2) made/adopted by W, (3) when fresh in W’s memory, (4) accurate when made, and (5) W’s memory insufficient to testify

Question 6

Testimony Question Objections

Answer 6

Calls for narrative
Unresponsive
Argumentative
Assumes facts not in E
Leading (ok if cross or hostile)