Evidence Under the Guam Rules
The Evidence section tests the Guam Rules of Evidence, modeled on the Federal Rules, in civil and criminal trials: relevance, character, hearsay, impeachment, privilege, expert testimony, and authentication. The exam favors questions where the purpose of the statement determines admissibility.
Relevance and character
- Rules 401 and 403: relevant evidence may be excluded if probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.
- Character evidence is generally inadmissible to prove conduct. Exceptions include a defendant's character in self-defense, a victim's character, and sexual-assault cases.
- Rule 404(b): other acts are admissible for motive, intent, plan, identity, or absence of mistake, not to show propensity.
Hearsay
- Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered for its truth. Non-hearsay includes prior statements under oath, admissions, effect on the listener, and verbal acts.
- Exceptions: excited utterance, present sense impression, business records, public records, learned treatises, dying declaration, and forfeiture by wrongdoing.
- The Confrontation Clause bars testimonial statements by unavailable declarants unless the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine.
Privileges, experts, and authentication
- Guam recognizes attorney-client, physician-patient, marital, and clergy privileges; local rules may modify them.
- Expert testimony requires qualification, reliability, and fit.
- Authentication uses distinctive characteristics, chain of custody, or stipulation.
Worked example
A Guam police officer testifies that a bystander said, "He just ran the red light and hit her." If offered to prove the light was red, the statement is hearsay. It may qualify as an excited utterance if the bystander was still under the stress of the event. If the bystander is unavailable and the statement is testimonial, such as a recorded police interview, the Confrontation Clause bars it unless the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine. If offered only to show why the officer acted, it is not hearsay.
Traps
- Treating every out-of-court statement as hearsay; check the purpose.
- Forgetting the Confrontation Clause overlay in criminal cases.
- Missing authentication for digital evidence.
- Assuming Guam's rules exactly match the Federal Rules where local amendments exist.
The best answers state the statement, the purpose, the rule, and the ruling in that order.