Evidence Law
This domain tests relevance, character limits, impeachment, hearsay and its exceptions, expert testimony, authentication, privileges, and the Confrontation Clause.
Relevance and character
Relevant evidence tends to make a fact more or less probable. Rule 403 excludes if probative value is substantially outweighed by danger of unfair prejudice, confusion, or waste. Character evidence is barred to prove propensity, but admissible for specific purposes (motive, intent, identity, absence of mistake, plan), and in sexual assault and child molestation cases under Rules 413–414.
Hearsay
An out-of-court statement offered for its truth. Nonhearsay uses include verbal acts, effect on the listener, and state of mind. Exemptions include party-opponent statements and prior inconsistent statements under oath. Exceptions include present sense impression, excited utterance, then-existing condition, medical treatment, recorded recollection, business records, and public records.
Confrontation and experts
Testimonial statements trigger confrontation rights absent unavailability plus prior opportunity, with forfeiture by wrongdoing as a limit. Expert testimony requires qualifications, reliable methodology, and helpfulness; the trial court gates reliability, and the jury weighs it.
Worked example
A neighbor calls 911 during an ongoing assault, gasping, "He's hitting her right now, come quickly." The call is an excited utterance and, because it describes an ongoing emergency, is nontestimonial - admitted without the declarant, with no confrontation violation.
Traps
- Forgetting to check each layer of a double hearsay statement.
- Treating prior consistent statements as admissible without a fabrication charge.
- Assuming business records are admissible without the regular-practice foundation.
- Confusing confidentiality with evidentiary privilege.