Popular in Evidence & Legal Reasoning
Popular in Department
This 3 page Class Notes was uploaded by Hannah Notetaker on Tuesday August 23, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to POLI 3380 at Auburn University taught by Dr. Clifton Perry in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 32 views.
Reviews for Evidence 8/23
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 08/23/16
8/23/16 Motion in Limine (pg. 8,13 - pretrial motion) argue that something that would be ligitiment for your opponent to use has so much prejudice against your argument that you have the court suppress it before the start of the trial if something is your only defense it is very likely that you will want to ﬁle this motion to keep it safe used to keep evidence out Rule 105 (pg. 12) if the court admits evidence that is admissible against a party then the court un- requests must return the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly this means the evidence has harmful meaning that the jury needs to not hear if your motion in limine gets denied you want a piece of evidence (not the whole evidence) to be heard when you are presenting it because this will aﬀect how the jury will look at the purpose example: instead of saying you called your brother about the weather in colorado, say you have a brother limiting instructions that do not allow all of the evidence in, just part of it — because of dangerous repercussions DV/JML — Directed Verdict(old term) / Judgement as a Matter of Law(new term) came from old common law to ask the judge to ﬁne in a particular way comes about at the end of the trial before it goes to the jury, an attorney can move for this to happen if this is denied, the jury comes back with their verdict JNOV/RJML — Judgement not withstanding the Verdict(old term) / Renewed Judgement as a Matter of Law(new term) the jury makes their verdict and the opposing side can call for this, basically making the jury’s verdict be thrown out and a new one be called in no more evidence and nothing has changed except for the outcome you have to move for a Directed Verdict in order to later move for the JNOV if this says no, then they can appeal these motions Direct Examination calling the own’s party to the witness and asking them questions can ask non-leading questions Cross-Examination asking the other party’s witness questions can ask leading questions only ask questions using the American Rule — says you can cross-examine only in the scope of the direct examination (English Rule is not allowed but it says you can ask any questions) example: if direct asked about A,B,C,D then you can only cross about A,B,C,D, not E then re-direct can only hit on the same subjects the cross hit on Rule 103 (pg. 24) someone is oﬀering evidence and you want to keep it out — so you object or wave it so it cannot be brought up on appeal if you object you have to give a reason in a timely fashion unless it is apparent from the context making a motion to strike is after the witness has already answered and the evidence has already been entered in you can make an oﬀer of proof if it is obvious that it is improper you don’t need to give a full reason Henderson v. US (2013) example of rule 103 1. Defendant pleads - possession of ﬁrearm (Felon) 2. District Court sentences 5 years 1. acknowledged as excessive by everyone involved but the attorney does not object 1. they then appeal that this is excessive 3. when they appeal they want them to employ Tapia case (see below) meaning there would be no reason for an objection meaning the attorney who did not object would have been ﬁne to not object; it would have just been obvious that it was too long 4. 5th Circuit (appellant court in Louisiana) denies because they had never thought of this or decided this so it sounds like not a plain error — which hurts the individual — they think it behoves you to object and give a reason on the risk that it would not be assumed as plain error; so now he has to argue that it was plain error (even though it was not in trial, it is in appellant) 5. meanwhile… US v. Tapia occurs in 2011 1. says unconstitutional to extend court time for rehab time — excess punishment would be against proportional punishment in order to obtain therapeutic beneﬁts 2. says it is bad to put you in prison longer than you are allowed 3. they use this ruling and 103e 6. if there is no plain error in trial it will aﬀect how the court looks at your case Rule 601 (pg. 26) everyone has competency to testify in general unless ruled otherwise except in circuit court Diversity (Rule 1332) actions happen you have a diversiﬁcation in the case and you use the federal rules of evidence and civil procedure but using the states rules for everything else applied to everything except cases with Burden of Proof, Presumptions, Privilege, or Competency to prove you are a competent witness: (Oath) you promised to tell the truth, (Communicate) you know what truth is and are able to tell it, (Experience) you have to have experience (without hearsay), and (Memory) you have to remember what happened
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'