400's
401
Test for Relevant Evidence
Evidence is relevant if:
(a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the
evidence; and
(b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.
602
Need for personal knowledge / Foundation
A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the witness’s own testimony. This rule is subject to the provisions of Rule 703, relating to opinion testimony by expert witnesses.
801
(a) Statement. “Statement” means a person’s oral assertion, written assertion, or nonverbal conduct, if the person intended it as an assertion.
(b) Declarant. “Declarant” means the person who made the statement.
(c) Hearsay. “Hearsay” means a statement that:
(1) the declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and
(2) a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.
(d) Statements that are NOT hearsay:
(1) a declarant-witness's prior statement (impeachment purposes)
(2) An Opposing Party’s Statement.
1002
Requirement of the Original (Best Evidence)
An original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a Midlands statute provide otherwise.
403
Rule 403. Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other
Reasons
The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following:
unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
701
Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses
If a witness is not testifying as an expert, testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to one that
is:
(a) rationally based on the witness’s perception;
(b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness’s testimony or to determining a fact in issue;
and
(c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702.
803 (general)
Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay – Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness
805
Hearsay Within Hearsay
404a
(a) Character Evidence.
(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of a person’s character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait.
(2) A defendant may offer evidence of the defendant’s pertinent trait
702
Testimony by Expert Witnesses
A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if the proponent demonstrates to the court that it ismore likely than not that:
(a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact
to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
(d) the expert’s opinion reflects a reliable application of the principles and methods to the facts of the case.
803.3
Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical Condition. A statement of the declarant’s then-existing state of mind (such as motive, intent, or plan) or emotional, sensory, or physical condition (such as mental feeling, pain, or bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the validity or terms of the declarant’s will.
804 (general)
Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay –When the Declarant Is Unavailable as a Witness
405
Methods of Proving Character
By Reputation or Opinion.
By Specific Instances of Conduct.
703
Bases of an Expert’s Opinion Testimony
An expert may base an opinion on facts or data in the case that the expert has been made aware of or personally observed. If experts in the particular field would reasonably rely on those kinds of facts or data in forming an opinion on the subject, they need not be admissible for the opinion to be admitted. But if the facts or data would otherwise be inadmissible, the proponent of the opinion may disclose them to the jury only if their probative value in helping the jury evaluate the opinion substantially outweighs their prejudicial effect.
803.1
Present Sense Impression. A statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it.
107
Admissibility of Demonstratives/Illustrative Aids
(a) Permitted Uses. The court may allow a party to present an illustrative aid to help the trier of fact understand the evidence or argument if the aid’s utility in assisting comprehension is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, or wasting time.
406
Habit; Routine Practice
Evidence of a person’s habit or an organization’s routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine or practice.
608
A Witness’s Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness
(a) Reputation or Opinion Evidence. A witness’s credibility may be attacked or supported by testimony about the witness’s reputation for having a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the form of an opinion about that character. But evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the witness’s character for truthfulness has been attacked.
(b) Specific Instances of Conduct. Except for a criminal conviction under Rule 609, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to prove specific instances of a witness’s conduct in order to attack or support the witness’s character for truthfulness.
803.2
Excited Utterance. A statement relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement that it caused.
106
106. Remainder of or Related Statements (Rule of Completion)
If a party introduces all or part of a statement, an adverse party may require the introduction of any other part – or any other statement – that in fairness ought to be considered. The adverse party may do so over a hearsay objection.