Bob the Builder
STEP-BY-STEP: Indigo Quade (D) is being crossed on the fact that they lied like a bajillion times. Defense counsel objects to hearsay.
NFTTOMA in fact you offering it for the opposite
Work State v. De La Porta into it
Taren Rivera testifies that "I found an oxalic acid scooper in the defendant's backpack. The same one they used the morning of the final challenge." You are defense how do you respond.
LOF: while its foundation Rivera can lay, its just proper for him to lay the foundation first and not make that conclusion without the foundation for the jury.
Make the best argument FOR and AGAINST Exhibit 14.
Best wins
Recite Zomerfield v. Noto and what rule it coincides with.
Zomerfeld v. Noto (2012)
Under MRE 104(a), when evaluating the admissibility of evidence, a trial court is permitted to
rely on both admissible and inadmissible evidence. The use of underlying inadmissible evidence
does not make that inadmissible evidence admissible. Instead, the court is permitted to consider
the underlying inadmissible evidence to assess the admissibility of the offered evidence. In a jury
trial, the jury may not always be privy to the underlying facts used to determine what evidence is
admissible, but the Court may hear it. Previously upheld examples include using character
evidence to make a ruling on hearsay exceptions, using hearsay to make a ruling on character
evidence, and using hearsay to decide whether an expert has adequate foundation to testify.
Rule 104. Preliminary Questions
(a) In General. The court must decide any preliminary question about whether a witness is
qualified, a privilege exists, or evidence is admissible. In so deciding, the court is not bound by
evidence rules, except those on privilege.
(b) Relevance That Depends on a Fact. When the relevance of evidence depends on whether a
fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist. The
court may admit the proposed evidence on the condition that the proof be introduced later.
When an arguing an objection what TWO things should you consider about the evidence?
Whether is Relevant or Reliable.
STEP-BY-STEP: The State move exhibits 17A-F (social media posts) into evidence. You are the state. You are confronted with a hearsay objection, what is your defense?
Not for the TOTMA; notice/effect on listener
Motion D
Defense offer Taylor Jha as an expert in Reality TV. You are the State. How do you react?
Pursuant Motion E, the only objectionable prong of 702 is 702(d)-however be on the lookout for speculation and LOF look B team v. American A
The State does not call Dr. Hartley, and tries to enter Exhibits 3 and 4 on Rowan Patel. You are Defense. How do you respond?
Although its preadmitted, there is a LOF as to why Rowan Patel would be shown this document and testify to it. Has to be Rivera
What is the evidentiary threshold when considering the admissibility of evidence?
Preponderance of the evidence more likely than not.
State v Wiseman: its not a beyond a reasonable doubt standard
Why does Relevance and Reliability matter to a jury?
Its the jury's job to find the truth. We don't want them to see irrelevant and unreliable evidence that could preclude them from doing so.
STEP-BY-STEP: Charlie Martin is testifying that the divers didn't go in until 11 minutes after Rob went in.(Marlowe Defense)
State v. Teglia
Goes to best argued w/ confidence; has to start with 403
On a Marlowe defense, Taylor Jha testifies that "They were dragging him out of the water but...he was dead before they pulled him out." You are the State. How do you respond.
DO NOT. Hartley nor Marlowe's opinion goes to Time of death it goes to why he drowned not when he ultimately died
When opposing has a demonstrative aid that isn't quite accurate or is rather confusing, what can you object to?
Rule 107. 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.
Subject to 403
Defense council is cross Riley Kaye, and asks, "Producers told you to delete the footage, because it would be the best for the company."
Not for the TOTMA; Chamber v. By the Book Publishing
104b
Relevance That Depends on a Fact. When the relevance of evidence depends on whether a
fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist. The
court may admit the proposed evidence on the condition that the proof be introduced later.
STEP-BY-STEP: Exhibit 15(character archetypes) are being offered by the State. The State argues the only reason they are offering it is for effect, to show that after Charlie Martin saw this she joined Season 10. How can they improve their argument?
Notice-Motion F2
Stipulation 12
DO nothing. Even though a lot of this is objectionable, we want a big season. We want them getting her on the show. We don't entirely dispute she agreed to back on the show. Avoid convoluted objections.
The State is trying to enter 18(b) including Rob's statements onto the record through Effect on Listener, which is Charlie Martin's response. You are the defense. What is the appropriate response?
Conversations and context are NOT non-hearsay uses. Otherwise whole conversations would be let onto the record.
On re-direct examination, the State asks Dr. Hartley, "If Rob Armstrong was exposed to 3 grams of oxalic acid would that have caused the hypoxia he experienced?" Dr. Hartley responds, yes. You are the defense. Do you respond?
Yes. Kane Software.
When something is to be determined by the jury and not the judge, what is the little buzzword phrase you start hitting?
Matter of weight not admissibility.
STEP-BY-STEP Micah Lin is testifying to Charlie Martin's susceptibility to be manipulated. The State objects to 704(b) that this goes to the defendant's ability to commit the crime. You are the Defense. Response?
Distinction + State v. Bunker
On the testimony of Indigo Quade(D) they say, "Producers didn't care about the lying to Ms. Martin, all they cared about was the show. They needed Ms. Martin to do that." You are the State how do you respond
RIH: Do object lowkey great for their case terrible for ours and its disgustingly objectionable
Dr. Lin is disclosing 26 a+b to the jury. You are the jury how do you react?
802: Hearsay, none of it is facts and data, they are conclusions and therefore not admissible under 703
Richards v. Mississippi
Dr. Micah Lin is testifying that the defendant had anxiety when pouring the Oxalic Acid. The Defense is attacking both causation and the defendant's mental state. You are the State. How do you react.
401 + State v. Nasipur
If a judge has made a similar ruling, what do they want to hear?
"As per your previous ruling..."