Transcript
1. What is meant by the term "relevant evidence"? What is the general rule concerning the admissibility of relevant evidence? Who makes the decision at trial that the evidence offered is relevant?
“Blacks Law Dictionary defines relevant evidence as “evidence tending to prove or disapprove a matter in issue.” Relevant evidence has also been described as evidence that in some degree advances the inquiry, and thus has probative value and is prima facie admissible.”(Ingram 2018, p. 211) The general rule for the admissibility of relevant evidence comes from Rule 402. All evidence that is logically and legally relevant is admissible, unless the constitution of the federal or state government, a statute, or a rule of law excludes evidence for a specific reason. (Ingram 2018 p.215) The trial judge makes the decision if the evidence is relevant.
3. Under the Neil v. Biggers test for witness identification, what are the constitutional requirements that must be met in order to allow the admissibility of evidence of a victim’s or witness’s pretrial identification of the defendant from photographs or a lineup?
“During this case, the Supreme Court decided upon a five-factor test to ensure the reliability of identification of suspects in criminal cases. This test is used by the judicial system to ensure that identification of suspects is not suggestive or violate the defendant’s constitutional rights. The five factors are: the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime; the witness’ degree of attention; the accuracy of the witness’s prior description of the criminal; the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation; and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.” (Ingram 2018, p.228)
4. Why might evidence of fleeing the scene or flight after the crime be indicative of guilt? Why is flight following a crime not always relevant evidence of a consciousness of guilt?
“A Kentucky court noted that the “common-law rule is based on the inference that the guilty run away but the innocent remain.””(Ingram 2018 p. 233) Also its noted that “universally conceded that the fact of an accused’s flight, escape from custody, resistance to arrest, concealment, assumption of a false name, and related conduct, are admissible as evidence of consciousness of guilt and thus guilt itself.”(Ingram 2018 p.233) “While flight and other such conduct do not raise a legal presumption of guilt, the jury may consider circumstance together with other facts in evidence and give the evidence the weight it thinks the evidence deserves.” (Ingram 2018 p.235)
9. What is meant by the term chain of custody? Is real evidence always inadmissible if there are minor defects in the chain of custody? Explain your answer.
Chain of Custody is defined as “in evidence, one who offers real evidence must account for the custody of the evidence from the moment when law enforcement officials originally gained custody until the moment when it is offered I evidence.”(Ingram 2018 p.487) “Because criminal prosecutions typically depend on evidence gathered by police officers, it is prosecutors who generally need to establish a chain of custody. In turn, a typical defense strategy is to attack the sufficiency of the prosecutor’s chain. If the defense succeeds in preventing the prosecutor from offering an exhibit into evidence, the judge might rule that the prosecutor has insufficient evidence to allow a case to continue. (That determination rests on how crucial the piece of evidence is to the case.)” (Accessed 7/15/2018) https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-chain-custody.html
11. Under what circumstances may summaries of voluminous documents be admitted into evidence in lieu of the actual documents?
According to Rule 1006, Summaries to Prove Content, “the content may use a summary chart, or calculations to prove the content of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot be conveniently examined in court. The proponent must make the originals or duplicates available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place. And the court may order the proponent need to account for the original. (Ingram 2018, p. 976) (Article X, Rule 1006 of the Federal Rules of Evidence)
