Lecture 1 Summary: Relevance and Witness Examination
Introduction to Evidence
Evidence law governs the admissibility of information in court to ensure fair, efficient, and reliable trials. The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) guide admissibility in federal courts and influence state rules. Key principles include relevance, judicial discretion, and balancing probative value against potential prejudice.
Relevance
Relevance is the foundational principle for admissibility.
Logical Relevance (Rule 401): Evidence is relevant if it makes a fact more or less probable. The standard is broad, and any minimal probative value suffices.
Legal Relevance (Rule 403 Balancing): Even relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by dangers like unfair prejudice, confusion, misleading the jury, or waste of time. Judicial discretion plays a significant role in applying Rule 403.
Witness Examination
Witness testimony is crucial but subject to rules on competency and examination procedures.
Competency: Witnesses must be able to perceive, recall, and communicate events truthfully. Special cases include children, mentally incapacitated individuals, and those with language barriers.
Direct Examination: Conducted by the calling party to elicit relevant testimony without leading questions (generally).
Cross-Examination: Conducted by the opposing party to challenge credibility and expose weaknesses using leading questions.
Redirect and Recross: Allow for clarification and response to new issues raised.
Common Objections: Include hearsay, relevance, leading questions, speculation, argumentative questions, and improper impeachment.
Key Takeaways
Relevance is essential, but Rule 403 allows for exclusions.
Judicial discretion is vital in evidentiary rulings.
Witness testimony follows structured rules and is subject to objections to maintain fairness.
