1
803-3
Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical Condition
404-1
Prohibited uses of character evidence
701
Opinion testimony by lay witnesses
Rule 401
Omnidirectional Solutions v. Little Bird Word LLC (2023)
It was never the intention of this Court for its holding in Tarot Readers Association of Midlands v. Merrell Dow (1994) and its progeny to create a rigid and unyielding standard for expert opinions. So long as the expert can sufficiently explain their expertise, training, and method for review, Tarot Readers Assoc. shall not be used by trial courts to prohibit otherwise credible and admissible opinions simply because there is not a known error rate or prior peer review of the expert’s analysis. Such questions and potential challenges of credibility are better left to cross examination.
703
Bases of an Expert's Opinion Testimony
405-A
Methods of proving character
- By reputation or opinion
801-B
Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay
(b) Declarant. “Declarant” means the person who made the statement.
Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts
201
Venue and identification of the defendant are necessary elements of every criminal prosecution. Because Midlands does not permit motions for acquittal, the defense closing argument is the proper place to bring it to the court’s attention that the prosecutor has failed to prove these necessary elements of the charged offense.
State v. Singh (2019)
803-5-C
Recorded Recollection
Accurately reflects the witness knowledge
107
Illustrative Aids
804-B-2
Exception to Hearsay
Statements Under the belief of imminent death
General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence
402
Richards v. Mississippi BBQ (1997)
Midlands Rule of Evidence 703 does not permit experts to testify or to present a chart in a manner that simply summarizes inadmissible hearsay without first relating that hearsay to some specialized knowledge on the expert’s part.
805
Hearsay within Hearsay
406
Habit; Routine practice
803-4
Statement Made for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment. A statement that:
(A) is made for – and is reasonably pertinent to – medical diagnosis or treatment; and
(B) describes medical history; past or present symptoms or sensations; their inception; or their general cause.
Need for personal knowledge
602
Held: To be inadmissible as hearsay, an out-of-court statement must be (a) an assertion of fact (b) offered to establish the truth of that asserted fact. No part of the rule against hearsay concerns itself with the “truth value” of an out-of-court statement beyond the fact asserted in the statement.
State v. B. F. De la Porta (2024)
415
Omitted
612
Writing used to refresh a Witness's memory
611-B
Scope of Examinations.
The initial cross examination is not limited to matters discussed on direct examination. Re-direct and re-cross examination are permitted. But any re-direct or re-cross examination may not go beyond the subject matter of the examination immediately preceding it and matters affecting the witness’s credibility.
702-D
the expert’s opinion reflects a reliable application of the principles and methods to the
facts of the case.
Ginger v. Heisman
Absent particularized reason to believe that the communication may have been sent by someone else, the fact that an electronic communication (an email, text, or social media post) is listed as coming from a number or account that is either known or purports to belong to a particular person is sufficient foundation that the communication was sent by the person.