Trial Evidence, Part 11: Using Character Evidence for “Non-character” Purposes
California Evidence Code section 1101(b) and its federal counterpart, FRE 404(b), allow the attorney to offer into evidence similar behavior of a person or entity if “relevant to prove some fact (such as motive, opportunity….) other than his or her disposition to commit such an act.” In doing so, these rules provide both significant opportunity […]
Trial Evidence Series, Part 9: Impeachment
When you cross-examine a witness, you’re generally trying to (1) elicit relevant information, or (2) impeach the witness’s credibility. Key to impeaching a witness is control. It’s usually best, therefore, to ask only those questions to which you can correctly anticipate the answers.
Trial Evidence Series Part VIII – Form of the Question: Cross-Exam
This is the eighth article in the ongoing series on trial evidence by Tim Hallahan.
Trial Evidence Part 7: Competence and Opinion
by Tim Hallahan Competence Competence relates to witnesses, not to evidence. Two issues arise: (1) Is the witness competent to testify about a particular subject? (2) Is she competent to testify at all? Competence as to Subject Matter The offering party must provide sufficient evidence of a witness’s personal knowledge of the facts about which […]
Trial Evidence Skills Series: Part VI
Exhibits This article is the sixth in a multi-part series on trial evidence. Exhibits are crucial in most trials: they seem to have more inherent credibility than oral testimony, they go into the jury room or judge’s chambers when the verdict is being decided, most people learn and retain five times better from their eyes […]