Popular in Evidence & Legal Reasoning
Popular in Department
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by Hannah Notetaker on Tuesday September 6, 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 9 views.
Reviews for Evidence 9/6
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: 09/06/16
9/6/16 Rule 401: Test for Relevant Evidence evidence is relative if it has any tendency to make more or less probably the existence of a fact that is of consequence in determining the action; puts these two together: Materiality - has to do with the case or concerns the case; would make sense to bring it up ex. someone being charged of homicide and he argues self defense, prosecution wants to argue that there was no gun - but the gun does not prove it wasn’t self defense because more than a gun can hurt you Relevance or Probative - or probability that you’ve increased or decreased the believability of a decision; evidence ways in favor of or against a certain conclusion or makes the argument stronger you can have evidence that is material but not relevant, but rule 401 brings the two together meaning it relates to the case and it makes it stronger or it weakens it relavant evidence is admissible, non-relevant evidence is not admissible Jaeger Case defendant homicide she had tried to commit suicide at a younger age and they sad this was not relevant - this is material but is it relevant or probative? arguing people change as they grow up, emotional states, etc. all situational Rule 403: excluding relevant evidence for prejudice, confusion, waste of time, or other reasons - REMEMBER THIS ONE, we will use it again 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 so the court can not let evidence in if it has the possibility of one of the reasons listed above, regardless of how relevant and material it is relavant cases: US v. Lizzie, Feaster, Old Chief US v. Lizzie said they don’t need all the evidence that they put in, only stick to the relevant and material Feaster argues on appeal that the trial court withheld evidence grand jury testimony was not allowed on trial said the testimony was hearsay, not credible, and would confuse the jury so rule 403 Old Chief assault on oﬃcer and possession of gun, convicted felon in order to prove the charge of a convicted felon with a gun, you have to prove that he is a felon stipulation that he is a felon because you don’t want to be convicted of both what happened in the past and what happened now is the prior crime relevant? 401 say it is relevant and is admissible; 403 is the correct argument because the probative value of allowing the prosecution to stipulate he was a felon - why does he want to prove it? there is no probative value, but because of the texture that fulﬁll the jury’s expectation of how it connects with conviction if there is no probable value then everything else is prejudice
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'