Objections
Scope:
A question/answer that is beyond in the witness statement
Rule 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.
Rule 601. General Rule of Competency
Every person is competent to be a witness.
Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witness
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’ perception;
(b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness’ 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.
Medical Diagnosis or Treatment:
803 (4) (a-b)
(a) in 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
More Prejudicial Then Probative:
803
relevant evidence if its probative value (its value as proof of some fact) is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission creates substantial danger of undue prejudice, confuses the issues, wastes time, or misleads the trier of fact (judge)
Rule 402. General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence
Relevant evidence is admissible unless these rules provide otherwise. Irrelevant
evidence is not admissible.
Rule 602. Need for Personal Knowledge
A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support
a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove
personal knowledge may consist of the witness’ own testimony. This rule does not apply to a witness’ expert testimony under Rule 703. (See also, Rule 4.16 in the Rules of
Competition)
Rule 702. Testimony by Experts
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:
(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; and
(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data.
Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity
803 (6) (a-e)
A record of an act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis if:
(a) the record was made at or near the time by - or from information transmitted by - someone with knowledge;
(b) the record was kept in course of a regularly conducted activity of a business, organization, occupation, or calling, whether or not for profit;
(c) making the record was a regular practice of that activity;
(d) all these conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness; and
(e) the opponent does not show that the source of the information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate a lack of trustworthiness
Speculation:
when the question asks of a witness to guess, assume, make a conclusion, or testify about matters they did not personally observe or know (does not apply to experts in some areas)
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.
Rule 607. Who May Impeach a Witness
Any party, including the party that called the witness, may attack the witness’
credibility
Rule 703. Basis 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.
Public Records:
803 (8) (a-b)
A record or statement of a public office if:
(a) it sets out:
(i) the office's activities:
(ii) a matter observed while under a legal duty to report, but not including, in a criminal case, a matter observed by law-enforcement personnel; or
(iii) in a civil case or against the government in a criminal case, factual findings from a legally authorized investigation; and
(b) the opponent does not show that the source of information or other circumstances indicate a lack trustworthiness
Hearsay:
1) The declarant does not make while testifying at the current trail or hearing; and
2) A party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement
Rule 404. Character Evidence; Crimes or Other Acts
Updated January 2023 (C) in a homicide case, the prosecutor may offer evidence of the alleged
victim’s trait of peacefulness to rebut evidence that the victim was the
first aggressor.
(3) Exceptions for a Witness. Evidence of a witness’ character may be admitted
under Rules 607, 608, and 609.
(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Other Acts.
(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to
prove a person’s character in order to show that on a particular occasion the
person acted in accordance with the character.
(2) Permitted Uses. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such
as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge,
identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.
Rule 608. A Witness’ Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness
(a) Reputation or Opinion Evidence. A witness’ credibility may be attacked or
supported by testimony about the witness’ 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’ 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’
conduct in order to attack or support the witness’ character for truthfulness. But
the court may, on cross-examination, allow them to be inquired into if they are
probative of the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of:
(1) the witness; or
(2) another witness whose character the witness being cross-examined has
testified about.
By testifying on another matter, a witness does not waive any privilege against self-
incrimination for testimony that relates only to the witness’ character for truthfulness.
Rule 704. Opinion on Ultimate Issue
(a) In General — Not Automatically Objectionable. An opinion is not objectionable
just because it embraces an ultimate issue.
(b) Exception. In a criminal case, an expert witness must not state an opinion about
whether the defendant did or did not have a mental state or condition that
constitutes an element of the crime charged or of a defense. Those matters are
for the trier of fact alone
Recorded Recollection:
803 (5) (a-c)
(a) is on a matter the witness once knew about know cannot recall well enough to testify fully and accurately;
(b) was made or adopted by the witness when the matter was fresh in the witness' memory; and
(c) accurately reflects the witness' knowledge
Unfair Extrapolation:
The witness is adding new information not in the case/witness statement that changes the facts (similar to speculation, but more extreme)
Rule 405. Methods of Proving Character
(a) By Reputation or Opinion. When evidence of a person’s character or character
trait is admissible, it may be proved by testimony about the person’s reputation
or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination of the character
witness, the court may allow an inquiry into relevant specific instances of the
person’s conduct.
(b) By Specific Instances of Conduct. When a person’s character or character trait is
an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, the character or trait may
also be proved by relevant specific instances of the person’s conduct.
Rule 609. Impeachment by Evidence of a Criminal Conviction
(a) In General. The following rules apply to attacking a witness’ character for
truthfulness by evidence of a criminal conviction:
(1) for a crime that, in the convicting jurisdiction, was punishable by death or by
imprisonment for more than one year, the evidence:
(A) must be admitted, subject to Rule 403, in a civil case or in a criminal case
in which the witness is not a defendant; and
(B) must be admitted in a criminal case in which the witness is a defendant,
if the probative value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to
that defendant; and (2) for any crime regardless of the punishment, the evidence must be admitted if
the court can readily determine that establishing the elements of the crime
required proving, or the witness’ admitting, a dishonest act or false
statement.
(b) Limit on Using the Evidence After 10 Years. This subdivision (b) applies if more
than 10 years have passed since the witness’ conviction or release from
confinement for it, whichever is later. Evidence of the conviction is admissible
only if its probative value, supported by specific facts and circumstances,
substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect.
(c) Effect of a Pardon, Annulment, or Certificate of Rehabilitation. Evidence of a
conviction is not admissible if:
(1) the conviction has been the subject of a pardon, annulment, certificate of
rehabilitation, or other equivalent procedure based on a finding that the
person has been rehabilitated, and the person has not been convicted of a
later crime punishable by death or by imprisonment for more than one year;
or
(2) the conviction has been the subject of a pardon, annulment, or other
equivalent procedure based on a finding of innocence.
(d) Juvenile Adjudications. Evidence of a juvenile adjudication is admissible under
this rule only if:
(1) it is offered in a criminal case;
(2) the adjudication was of a witness other than the defendant;
(3) an adult’s conviction for that offense would be admissible to attack the adult’s
credibility; and
(4) admitting the evidence is necessary to fairly determine guilt or innocence.
(e) Pendency of an Appeal. A conviction that satisfies this rule is admissible even if
an appeal is pending. Evidence of the pendency is also admissible.
Rule 705. Disclosing the Facts or Data Underlying an Expert’s Opinion
Unless the court orders otherwise, an expert may state an opinion — and give the
reasons for it — without first testifying to the underlying facts or data. But the expert
may be required to disclose those facts or data on cross-examination.
Reputation Concerning Character:
803 (21)
A reputation among a person's associates or in the community concerning the person's character