Chapter 4 Types of Evidence - RCC Administration of Justice · innocence. • What fact or ... •...
Transcript of Chapter 4 Types of Evidence - RCC Administration of Justice · innocence. • What fact or ... •...
Chapter 4 Types of Evidence
“Circumstantial evidence is a very tricky thing. It may seem to point very straight to one thing, but if you shift your own point of view a little, you may find it pointing in an equally uncompromising manner to something
entirely different.” Sir Arthur Conon Doyle
Featured Case
• In 2008 Casey Anthony was arrested for the murder of her 2 year old daughter.
• Some evidence pointed toward her guilt; but all of it was circumstantial.
• Witnesses for both sides gave contradictory and confusing testimony.
• After 32 days of deliberation the jury returned a not guilty verdict.
• How was the evidence utilized to reach this verdict? Was justice done?
• The Anthony case was widely publicized. • Many people felt there was strong evidence
to support her guilt. • A jury however starts from the premise of
innocence. • What fact or facts do you think most strongly
pointed to guilt? • What fact or facts do you think the jury relied
upon to proclaim her innocence?
Applying the Law Trial by Media
Learning Objectives
• Define and describe what is relevant and material evidence.
• Define what is direct evidence and how it differs from circumstantial evidence.
• Explain real evidence. • Give examples of testimonial evidence. • Define stipulations, judicial notice and
presumptions, explain how they are used at trial.
Relevant Evidence
• Defined – Evidence that make any fact important to the case, more or less likely.
• FRE 401
• Relevant evidence is probative, it offers some proof a fact did or did not occur. – Probative value
Objections and Relevancy
• Evidence that is not relevant is not admissible.
• An attorney may object and require the judge to rule on the relevancy of any evidence.
• If there is no objection, no proof of relevancy need be offered.
• Isn’t it true that any information can only help make a decision?
• Why then is some information kept from the trier of fact?
• How can a judge not use evidence he has already heard, even if he ruled it irrelevant? – Can he simply ‘forget’ what he heard?
Applying the Law What is Relevant?
Material Evidence
• Evidence that has some logical connection to the facts of the trial and effects whether they can be shown to be true or false.
• Evidence that has no connection is immaterial, and inadmissible.
Exclusion of Relevant Evidence
• Exclusion of Evidence is a balancing test.
• Judges look at the impact of the evidence.
• FRE 403 (Exclusion of Otherwise Relevant Evidence)
Typical Cases of Exclusion
• Evidence that is unduly prejudicial due to high emotional impact.
• Prior convictions of crimes not closely related in manner or time to the current case.
• Evidence that distracts from the main issues at trial.
Cumulative v. Corroborative
• Cumulative Evidence repeats other evidence or facts. – Less likely to be admitted
• Corroborative Evidence adds new facts and confirms other evidence. – More likely to be admitted
Direct Evidence
• Direct Evidence is evidence that conclusively establishes something as true – if it is believed by the jury.
• Direct evidence of a fact in issue is always relevant.
Circumstantial Evidence
• Is evidence that indirectly proves a fact.
• It requires the jury or judge to make an inference or deduction.
• It is not grounds to object to the admission of evidence simply by stating it is circumstantial.
Inference
• Defined as a logical conclusion based on a fact or facts.
• But other logical explanations are possible.
Testimonial Evidence
• Defined as evidence given by a witness under oath or affirmation.
• It can occur in court or before court, usually in a deposition. But to be testimonial each must be under oath.
• Testimonial Evidence is critical.
Real Evidence
• Defined – physical evidence that itself plays a direct part in the incident in question.
• Including physical evidence, demonstrative evidence and tangible evidence.
• Recently a number of men convicted of crimes have been released when DNA evidence seemed to contradict their conviction.
• How much weight should testimonial versus real evidence be given?
• Is real evidence somehow better? • What practical standard should we use
here?
Applying the Law Real versus Testimonial Evidence
Substitutes for Evidence
• Include – Stipulations – Judicial Notice – Presumptions
Stipulations
• An agreement between the prosecution and defense to admit one or more facts into evidence.
• Stipulations can be written or oral.
• Typically they are made before trial, often to simplify or speed up the proceedings.
Judicial Notice
• Defined – A procedure whereby the judge instructs the jury to conclude a fact exists.
• FRE 201 (Defines Judicial Notice)
• Often used for state laws or the content of court records.
Presumption
• Defined – A legal inference or assumption that a fact exists based on the known or proven existence of some other fact or group of facts.
• The ‘basic fact’ is what is necessary to establish a presumption may exist.
• The ‘presumed fact’ is what may be assumed if the basic fact exists.
Figure 4-1 Conclusive, Strong Rebuttable, and Weak Rebuttable Presumptions
Francis v. Franklin
• The defendant was on trial for capital murder.
• As a prisoner he escaped custody and fled to a private residence.
• The defendant shot through a closed door, killing the deceased when the victim refused to turn over his car.
• At trial the defendant’s sole defense was that he did not intend to kill.
• The judge’s instruction allowed the jury to presume the intent to kill.
• The Supreme Court overturned the conviction, such presumptions can NOT be mandatory.
471 US 307 (1985)
• Traditionally for a crime you had to have BOTH the physical act and the mental state of mind (mens rea).
• However it seems were are moving towards a approach of strict liability.
• Is the intent to commit an act worth keeping in the criminal law?
• How much impact should intent have on charges, conviction or punishment?
Applying the Law Mens Rea
Limits on Presumptions
• Three constitutional limits on Presumptions – A presumption must be based on a logical
assumption rather than mere policy – When used by the prosecution, the basic
fact must be established beyond a reasonable doubt
– A presumption cannot shift the burden of proof to the defendant
In re Winship • During a juvenile hearing the State sought to convict a teenager under a lesser standard of proof.
• The Supreme court rules that EVERY essential element of a crime must be proved.
• A presumption of innocence is a foundation of American law.
397 US 358, (1970)
Types of Presumptions
• Two general types of presumptions: – Rebuttable and Conclusive.
• Rebuttable may also be divided into strong and weak.
• For each you need still prove the ‘basic fact’ before the presumed fact may be considered.
• The elements of crime rarely contain motive as a element, yet it seems critical in finding guilt.
• Is it likely a person would commit a crime for no reason whatsoever?
• Does this mean motive has to be proved in order to convict?
• Does lack of motive mean someone is innocent, or does a strong motive prove guilt?
Applying the Law The Hidden Element