Chapter 7,8,9

Question	Answer
Probative value	-value/strength of a fact in proving what the party seeks to establish
Potential prejudice 2pts	-potential for piece of proposed evidence to be misused -usually, given too much weight by trier of fact
Similar fact evidence 2pts	-evidence shows accused committed similar offences in past - may be admitted provided it is relevant to establishing important matter other than the accused's predisposition to commit that type of offence
Test for similar fact evidence 4pts	-presumptively inadmissible - onus on prosecution to satisfy trial judge on balance of probabilities -in context of particular case probative value of the evidence in relation to a particular issue outweighs its potential prejudice -thereby justifies its reception
Moral prejudice	-prejudice results from admission of evidence of bad character -showing accused to be morally bad person - leading trier of fact to conclude he is guilty
Reasoning prejudice	-applies to evidence that, if admitted, may confuse trier of fact/distract trier of fact from the issue it must decide
Propensity evidence 4pts	-evidence of accused's past history/tendency to act in certain way –psychiatric tendencies – ALWAYS given by expert –proves disposition –presumptively inadmissible
rape shield provisions	-provisions in Criminal Code forbid the admission of evidence of a complainant's sexual history to support inference that she is more likely to have given consent/less worthy of belief
Character evidence 4pts	– how person behaved on another occasion –used to draw inferences from past conduct to show patterns/traits –this is their character –presumptively inadmissible
Test to admit character evidence	– judge must weigh probative value/prejudicial effect
Character evidence no testify	–if accused doesn’t testify then criminal record not admissible because he didn’t put his character in issue.
Character evidence testify 3pts	- if accused testifies then criminal record admissible because he brought credibility into issue -cannot use it to attack character -only credibility
Disposition/propensity 3pts	–evidence not admissible to prove disposition, only to prove propensity –must weigh probative value/prejudicial effect –cannot lead evidence that because of it they killed, only that they have capacity for it
Wigmore exceptions to hearsay rule 2pts	necessary -only way evidence admitted through hearsay relatively reliable- in circumstances statement made.
Dying Declaration Wigmore test 2pts	N-person unavailable R-person unlikely to make false statement that harms interest
Declarations against pecuniary or proprietary interest and declarations against penal interest are: 2pts	1. person making statement must be unavailable. 2. statement must be against statement-maker’s interest.
Dying declaration Wigmore 5pts	N-Person must be dead R-Only applies to criminal proceedings –more likely true than not –probably for religious reasons –or clean slate
Res Gestae Wigmore 2pts	N-must establish statement could only be admitted through hearsay. R-no time for concoction
Business Records Wigmore 4pts	N-if had to call every nurse/bookkeeper who made entries too long for courts -sometimes can’t determine who made record R-if made as part of regular business they have interest in maintaining accurate records -no motive to misrepresent
Prior testimony Wigmore 2pts	N-witness unavailable R-sworn evidence and opportunity to cross-examine
Prior inconsistent statement 3pts	N-recanting witness –if automatically excluded could invite intimidation R -sworn statement, videotaped, and cross examined
Past Recollection Recorded Wigmore 2pts	N-witness can’t remember details unless refer to record R-contemporaneous, made in reliable manner
principled exception	-exception to hearsay rule based on principles of necessity & reliability
Test court will apply in determining hearsay is: 4pts	1. Does hearsay fall within TRADITIONAL exceptions 2.Does it meet tests of NECESSITY/RELIABILITY 3.If so, admissible as long as not more prejudicial than probative. 4. If doesn’t meet a traditional exception may be admitted as long as meets tests of necessity/reliability
Opinion evidence 2pts	- evidence given by witness based on conclusions/inferences drawn from facts or observations –generally witness not permitted to state conclusions/inferences themselves only the observations
Layperson's opinion 2pts	- opinion given by an ordinary witness on matter of ordinary experience -permitted where opinion does not unnecessarily encroach on trier of fact’s role.
3 criteria to determine whether opinion evidence of lay witness accepted:	1. The opinion is one that a layperson could ordinarily be expected to arrive at. 2. The lay witness has sufficient experience to draw these conclusions. 3. The lay witness is better situated than the trier of fact to form the conclusions.
Compendious mode of expressing facts 2pts	- witness mixes opinion into testimony in order to express himself -permitted by court where difficult for witness to express info without stating an opinion.
expert opinion 2pts	–testimony given by properly qualified person with specific expertise in area In issue - permitted to assist trier of fact in coming to conclusions of fact in that area
Mohan test for expert evidence 4pts	1. Relevance 2. Necessity 3. Properly qualified witness 4. The absence of any exclusionary rule
Relevance/probative value of expert evidence 3pts	1. Connection between expert and issue 2. Strength in proving issues 3. Importance of evidence –more significant issue the better.
Foundation of Expert Witness 2pts	- foundation of expert's testimony usually established by posing a hypothetical question for expert to answer. –Then bring facts of case into line with hypothetical.
Hearsay and expert evidence 2pts	- For expert's opinion to be given weight, there must be some admissible evidence that goes to the foundation of the expert's opinion. -The more the expert relies on hearsay evidence, the less weight evidence can be given.
Ultimate issue opinion 5pts	- opinion on ultimate issue before trier of fact -generally, witnesses not permitted because trier of fact could be swayed - experts may express opinions on ultimate issue where such evidence will be of assistance to the trier of fact. -Not acceptable = “He's as guilty as hell." -Acceptable = "In my opinion, Mr. Abbey was insane at the time that he killed his wife."
Oath helping 2pts	-testimony by witness in which he approves of/comments favourably on credibility of another witness - generally prohibited because witness should have testimony evaluated its merits
In order to be admissible, novel science must meet 3 criteria:	1. Must be essential. Trier of fact cannot come to a satisfactory conclusion without this aid. 2. must withstand special scrutiny. Reliability of science must be established because scientific community has not generally accepted it yet, 3. must satisfy even stricter necessity and reliability requirements where it approaches the ultimate issue in the matter.

Next up

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by Penny-Ann Lupton over 9 years ago