Evidence
Relevance and Character
Relevance is a low bar (probative plus material); Rule 403 excludes unfair prejudice. Character evidence is barred to prove propensity, except: the accused may open the door, the prosecution may rebut, victim character in self-defense, and specific sex-offense exceptions (with 404(b) notice requirements). Other acts are admissible for MIMIC: motive, identity, absence of mistake, intent, common plan.
Impeachment and Hearsay
Impeach with prior inconsistent statements (under oath, also substantive), bias, sensory deficiency, convictions (felony with 403; dishonesty per se), reputation for truthfulness, and contradiction. Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered for truth. Nonhearsay: effect on listener, verbal act, state of mind. Exemptions: party-opponent and prior sworn statements. Exceptions: present sense impression, excited utterance, then-existing condition, medical treatment, business records, public records, learned treatises, judgment of conviction, dying declaration, forfeiture.
Confrontation, Experts, and Privileges
Crawford bars testimonial hearsay absent unavailability plus prior cross-examination. Experts need qualification, reliable method, and helpfulness (Daubert; California uses Kelly-Frye). Authentication and the best-evidence rule complete the chain. Privileges: attorney-client, physician-patient (California), spousal.
Traps
- A statement offered to show its effect is not hearsay even if false.
- Prior consistent statements are generally rehabilitative, not substantive.
- Curative admissibility does not open the door to extrinsic evidence on collateral matters.
Worked example: "Watch out, the floor is wet!" offered to show the listener had notice is nonhearsay; offered to prove the floor was wet, it is hearsay but likely an excited utterance or present sense impression.