649:, the defendant was on trial for an altercation that resulted in him firing a weapon. The defendant had previously been convicted of a crime resulting in imprisonment for one year, which put him in violation of a statute prohibiting certain convicted felons from possessing guns. The defendant wished to stipulate he was a convicted felon and prevent the government from referencing the specifics of his prior conviction. The Court ruled that the specifics of his prior conviction were inadmissible, in part, due to F.R.E. 403, given the prejudice to the defendant would outweigh its probative value since the defendant already admitted he had previously been convicted of a crime.
638:
further evidence those weapons were brought to the scene of the crime. F.R.E. 403 lists some of the reasons that relevant evidence would be excluded. These reasons include: the likelihood of the jury becoming unduly prejudiced to a party, and a likelihood that the evidence will cause the jury to confuse the issues or be mislead, etc. Issues such as the evidence's prejudicial effect are balanced with how probative the evidence is. A court may exclude evidence if the issues it presents, such as prejudice, substantially outweigh the value of the evidence.
22:
567:. The type of preliminary evidence necessary to lay the proper foundation depends on the form and type of material evidence offered. Further, a proper foundation must be laid with respect to witness testimony. The type of questioning and evidence necessary to properly lay a witness foundation differs based on what the witness is testifying to, and in what capacity they are testifying.
692:
Attorneys must lay a foundation for witness testimony at trial. The process differs when the witness is a lay witness or an expert witness. However, as a baseline matter for both expert and lay witnesses, the testimony must be established to be helpful in assisting the trier of fact understand a fact
683:
Once the item of evidence is with the witness, the proponent must lay sufficient foundation to establish the evidence's authenticity. The attorney must now elicit answers from the witness that establish the evidence is what is purports to be. Once a sufficient foundation has been laid, the proponent
679:
There is a process attorneys must follow before being allowed to show evidence to the jury. First, the proponent of the evidence must request that the item be marked for identification. The proponent will then hand the item of evidence to the bailiff/court reporter who will mark it (ie.: Exhibit 1).
657:
As a preliminary matter, a lawyer must introduce sufficient facts to the court to suggest that the introduction of evidence will meet the standard set forth in F.R.E. 401. This may be done outside of the presence of the jury at a preliminary hearing. There, under relaxed evidentiary rules, attorneys
714:
An expert witness is a witness with a particular skillset and set of credentials that allows them to formulate a specialized opinion on an issue in a case. Expert witnesses may formulate and testify to opinions which lay witnesses would be disallowed to make. Further, unlike lay witnesses, expert
637:
Evidence is not admissible just because it is relevant. For example, in a murder case where the victim was killed by a gunshot wound, evidence showing the
Defendant owned guns is relevant; however, evidence that the defendant owned guns is inadmissible to show he is a "murderous criminal" without
701:
A lay witness is a non-expert who may only provide opinions based upon their own personal knowledge of particular facts at issue in a case. F.R.E. 602 provides the rule relating to the necessary foundation that must be laid for a witness to testify on a particular matter. The rule states that a
670:
For example, if the prosecution in a murder case wishes to present a photograph of the crime scene to the jury, they must verify that the photograph is an accurate representation of the what it is being offered to show (the murder scene). This may include facts with regards to: distances in the
705:
Lawyers typically elicit the necessary information to establish a foundation for lay witnesses via targeted questions during testimony. For example, to establish a basis of a lay witness's personal opinion of a defendant, an attorney may ask the witness questions such as: whether they know the
726:
standard inquires: 1) whether the expert's scientific method has been subject to testing, 2) whether the method has undergone peer review and been published, 3) how fallible is the method, 4) whether the method is subject to particular standards when it is undertaken, 5) whether the method is
684:
may ask the judge to move the item into evidence. The judge will then ask if there are any objections from opposing counsel, and make a determination as to whether or not the evidence will be admitted. If the judge rules to admit the evidence, it can then be shown to the jury.
715:
witnesses do not need to have personally observed the facts at issue to make an opinion. However, F.R.E 703 mandates that the experts base their scientific findings on facts or data that another experts in the same field would reasonably rely upon to come to a determination.
680:
After the item of evidence has been marked for purposes of identification, the attorney must then hand it to opposing counsel for inspection. Following opposing counsel's inspection, the proponent can then bring the item of evidence to the witness.
666:
The
Federal Rules of Evidence mandate that evidence be authentic in order to be introduced at trial. This means the proponent of evidence must "produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is."
617:
In determining these two factors, courts question what issues are consequential in a particular case, and whether the evidence a party seeks to admit has any tendency to prove or disprove a fact at issue. This is called weighing the evidence's
706:
defendant? How do you know the defendant? How long have you known the defendant? These questions serve to establish the fact that the witness has developed their own perception of the defendant through their own experience.
727:
accepted in the scientific community in which it is employed? If a combination of these factors are established following an objection by opposing counsel, the expert's opinion will be deemed admissible.
590:
The
Federal Rules of Evidence states rules regarding a piece of evidence's relevancy and whether or not it is admissible. F.R.E. 402 states relevant evidence is admissible unless otherwise excluded by:
622:, which is a term used to describe the amount which a fact either proves or disproves an issue. This process of testing evidence's probative value requires a process of legal analysis and reasoning.
549:. Although the word "Foundation" does not appear in the Federal Rules of Evidence, scholars have argued that its existence is displayed, albeit implicitly, when viewing all the rules in context.
625:
Courts are extremely liberal when determining whether or not evidence is probative, erring on the side of admission rather than excluding evidence for being irrelevant. Evidence that is
227:
671:
photograph, inaccuracies or distortions, the camera the photograph was taken with, the circumstances under which the photo was taken, etc.
1007:"Rule 403 - Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons | 2023 Federal Rules of Evidence"
86:
1372:
58:
504:
39:
65:
593:
The U.S. Constitution, a federal statute, the
Federal Rules of Evidence, or other rules proscribed by the Supreme Court
105:
72:
54:
43:
702:
sufficient amount of evidence must be proposed to show that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter.
571:
412:
377:
280:
718:
Prior to the promulgation on F.R.E. 702, the standard for admissibility of expert opinion was guided by
497:
387:
518:
290:
179:
609:
it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and
555:
evidence is important evidence that may serve to determine the outcome of a case. Exhibits include
417:
79:
32:
560:
372:
232:
194:
174:
1367:
490:
353:
343:
247:
212:
722:
That standard, while superseded by 702, is still a valid challenge to expert testimony. The
564:
530:
328:
313:
256:
169:
164:
149:
8:
538:
333:
1284:
1244:
1006:
603:
F.R.E. 401 outlines the test for whether or not evidence is relevant. The rule states:
469:
318:
275:
237:
1073:
552:
434:
397:
392:
338:
323:
222:
1285:"Rule 703 - Bases of an Expert's Opinion Testimony | 2023 Federal Rules of Evidence"
1338:
429:
407:
382:
308:
285:
265:
159:
1150:
Authentication or verification of photograph as basis for introduction in evidence
925:
1110:
887:
845:
534:
402:
270:
203:
189:
526:
348:
242:
121:
1361:
658:
present arguments to the court for or against the admissibility of evidence.
575:
556:
184:
154:
478:
464:
1245:"Rule 602 - Need for Personal Knowledge | 2023 Federal Rules of Evidence"
595:." F.R.E. 402 further provides that irrelevant evidence is inadmissible.
579:
815:
444:
423:
674:
542:
473:
144:
21:
1074:"Rule 104 - Preliminary Questions | 2023 Federal Rules of Evidence"
454:
546:
362:
299:
459:
652:
129:
846:"Rule 402. General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence"
613:
the fact is of consequence in determining the action."
46:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
1111:"Rule 901. Authenticating or Identifying Evidence"
948:PROBATIVE, Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).
675:Process of Authenticating & Admitting Exhibits
629:is inadmissible in court according to F.R.E. 402.
632:
1359:
541:of material evidence in the form of exhibits or
1231:WITNESS, Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019)
641:Another example of this balancing test is in
498:
1311:Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
720:Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
505:
491:
1272:Laying a Foundation to Introduce Evidence
1197:Laying a Foundation to Introduce Evidence
106:Learn how and when to remove this message
1360:
1306:
1304:
1266:
1264:
1239:
1237:
1227:
1225:
1223:
1068:
1066:
1064:
1054:
1052:
1050:
1034:
1032:
1030:
1028:
1026:
1001:
999:
997:
995:
985:
983:
981:
979:
888:"Rule 401. Test for Relevant Evidence"
653:Conclusion on Relevance and Foundation
1191:
1189:
1176:
1174:
1172:
1170:
1168:
1166:
1164:
1162:
1160:
1158:
1144:
1142:
1132:
1130:
1108:
1104:
1102:
911:
909:
907:
885:
881:
879:
877:
843:
813:
797:
795:
767:
765:
763:
761:
746:, 100 Geo. L. J. 95, 100 (Nov. 2011).
598:
1328:, 402 F.3d 752, 758 (7th Cir. 2005).
867:
865:
839:
837:
835:
809:
807:
687:
44:adding citations to reliable sources
15:
1301:
1261:
1234:
1220:
1061:
1047:
1023:
992:
976:
709:
13:
1186:
1155:
1139:
1127:
1099:
959:On The Uses of Irrelevant Evidence
904:
874:
792:
758:
570:The lack of foundation is a valid
14:
1384:
1343:LII / Legal Information Institute
1270:Continuing Education of the Bar,
1195:Continuing Education of the Bar,
1115:LII / Legal Information Institute
930:LII / Legal Information Institute
892:LII / Legal Information Institute
862:
850:LII / Legal Information Institute
832:
820:LII / Legal Information Institute
804:
661:
696:
20:
1331:
1316:
1277:
1211:
1202:
1090:
964:
951:
942:
918:
744:A Foundation Theory of Evidence
31:needs additional citations for
1373:Evidence law legal terminology
1109:Staff, L. I. I. (2011-11-30).
886:Staff, L. I. I. (2011-11-30).
844:Staff, L. I. I. (2011-11-30).
814:Staff, L. I. I. (2011-11-30).
783:
774:
749:
736:
633:Exclusion of Relevant Evidence
1:
730:
961:, 34 Hous. L. Rev. 1 (1997).
585:
413:Declaration against interest
281:Self-authenticating document
7:
816:"Federal Rules of Evidence"
10:
1389:
643:Old Chief v United States.
605:"Evidence is relevant if:
525:is sufficient preliminary
55:"Foundation" evidence
1289:Federal Rules of Evidence
1249:Federal Rules of Evidence
1078:Federal Rules of Evidence
1042:Old Chief v United States
1011:Federal Rules of Evidence
973:, 254 N.Y. 192 (NY 1930).
559:, illustrative evidence,
291:Hague Evidence Convention
180:Eyewitness identification
418:Present sense impression
228:Public policy exclusions
1181:Evidentiary Foundations
1313:, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
1044:, 519 U.S. 172 (1997).
755:Fed. R. Evid. Art. IX.
693:at issue in the case.
561:demonstrative evidence
195:Consciousness of guilt
1326:United States v Parra
1217:Fed. R. Evid. 702(a).
1208:Fed. R. Evid. 701(b).
344:Recorded recollection
1152:, 9 A.L.R.2d 899, 1.
1096:40 CFR 78.14 (2023).
565:documentary evidence
378:in United States law
40:improve this article
971:People v. Zackowitz
742:David S. Schwartz,
218:Laying a foundation
1339:"Daubert standard"
1136:Fed. R. Evid. 901.
1058:Fed. R. Evid. 104.
989:Fed. R. Evid. 403.
915:Fed. R. Evid. 401.
871:Fed. R. Evid. 402.
801:Fed. R. Evid. 703.
789:Fed. R. Evid. 702.
771:Fed. R. Evid. 602.
599:Test for Relevance
474:trusts and estates
354:Dead Man's Statute
319:Direct examination
276:Best evidence rule
1274:, STEP 29 (2021).
926:"probative value"
780:Fed. R. Evid 701.
688:Witness Testimony
578:may raise during
515:
514:
435:Implied assertion
398:Dying declaration
393:Excited utterance
339:Proffer agreement
324:Cross-examination
137:Types of evidence
116:
115:
108:
90:
1380:
1353:
1352:
1350:
1349:
1335:
1329:
1320:
1314:
1308:
1299:
1298:
1296:
1295:
1281:
1275:
1268:
1259:
1258:
1256:
1255:
1241:
1232:
1229:
1218:
1215:
1209:
1206:
1200:
1199:, STEP 1 (2021).
1193:
1184:
1178:
1153:
1146:
1137:
1134:
1125:
1124:
1122:
1121:
1106:
1097:
1094:
1088:
1087:
1085:
1084:
1070:
1059:
1056:
1045:
1036:
1021:
1020:
1018:
1017:
1003:
990:
987:
974:
968:
962:
955:
949:
946:
940:
939:
937:
936:
922:
916:
913:
902:
901:
899:
898:
883:
872:
869:
860:
859:
857:
856:
841:
830:
829:
827:
826:
811:
802:
799:
790:
787:
781:
778:
772:
769:
756:
753:
747:
740:
710:Expert Witnesses
507:
500:
493:
430:Learned treatise
408:Ancient document
388:Business records
286:Ancient document
266:Chain of custody
118:
117:
111:
104:
100:
97:
91:
89:
48:
24:
16:
1388:
1387:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1347:
1345:
1337:
1336:
1332:
1321:
1317:
1309:
1302:
1293:
1291:
1283:
1282:
1278:
1269:
1262:
1253:
1251:
1243:
1242:
1235:
1230:
1221:
1216:
1212:
1207:
1203:
1194:
1187:
1179:
1156:
1147:
1140:
1135:
1128:
1119:
1117:
1107:
1100:
1095:
1091:
1082:
1080:
1072:
1071:
1062:
1057:
1048:
1037:
1024:
1015:
1013:
1005:
1004:
993:
988:
977:
969:
965:
956:
952:
947:
943:
934:
932:
924:
923:
919:
914:
905:
896:
894:
884:
875:
870:
863:
854:
852:
842:
833:
824:
822:
812:
805:
800:
793:
788:
784:
779:
775:
770:
759:
754:
750:
741:
737:
733:
712:
699:
690:
677:
664:
655:
635:
620:probative value
601:
588:
511:
403:Party admission
271:Judicial notice
213:Burden of proof
155:Real (physical)
112:
101:
95:
92:
49:
47:
37:
25:
12:
11:
5:
1386:
1376:
1375:
1370:
1355:
1354:
1330:
1315:
1300:
1276:
1260:
1233:
1219:
1210:
1201:
1185:
1183:§ 4.01 (2023).
1154:
1138:
1126:
1098:
1089:
1060:
1046:
1022:
991:
975:
963:
950:
941:
917:
903:
873:
861:
831:
803:
791:
782:
773:
757:
748:
734:
732:
729:
711:
708:
698:
695:
689:
686:
676:
673:
663:
662:Authentication
660:
654:
651:
634:
631:
600:
597:
587:
584:
513:
512:
510:
509:
502:
495:
487:
484:
483:
482:
481:
476:
467:
462:
457:
449:
448:
440:
439:
438:
437:
432:
427:
420:
415:
410:
405:
400:
395:
390:
385:
380:
375:
373:in English law
367:
366:
365:and exceptions
359:
358:
357:
356:
351:
349:Expert witness
346:
341:
336:
331:
326:
321:
316:
311:
303:
302:
296:
295:
294:
293:
288:
283:
278:
273:
268:
260:
259:
257:Authentication
253:
252:
251:
250:
245:
240:
235:
230:
225:
220:
215:
207:
206:
200:
199:
198:
197:
192:
187:
182:
177:
172:
167:
162:
157:
152:
147:
139:
138:
134:
133:
125:
124:
114:
113:
28:
26:
19:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1385:
1374:
1371:
1369:
1366:
1365:
1363:
1344:
1340:
1334:
1327:
1324:
1319:
1312:
1307:
1305:
1290:
1286:
1280:
1273:
1267:
1265:
1250:
1246:
1240:
1238:
1228:
1226:
1224:
1214:
1205:
1198:
1192:
1190:
1182:
1177:
1175:
1173:
1171:
1169:
1167:
1165:
1163:
1161:
1159:
1151:
1148:M. L. Cross,
1145:
1143:
1133:
1131:
1116:
1112:
1105:
1103:
1093:
1079:
1075:
1069:
1067:
1065:
1055:
1053:
1051:
1043:
1040:
1035:
1033:
1031:
1029:
1027:
1012:
1008:
1002:
1000:
998:
996:
986:
984:
982:
980:
972:
967:
960:
957:David Crump,
954:
945:
931:
927:
921:
912:
910:
908:
893:
889:
882:
880:
878:
868:
866:
851:
847:
840:
838:
836:
821:
817:
810:
808:
798:
796:
786:
777:
768:
766:
764:
762:
752:
745:
739:
735:
728:
725:
721:
716:
707:
703:
697:Lay Witnesses
694:
685:
681:
672:
668:
659:
650:
648:
644:
639:
630:
628:
623:
621:
615:
614:
612:
608:
596:
594:
583:
581:
577:
576:adverse party
573:
568:
566:
562:
558:
557:real evidence
554:
550:
548:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
524:
520:
508:
503:
501:
496:
494:
489:
488:
486:
485:
480:
477:
475:
471:
468:
466:
463:
461:
458:
456:
453:
452:
451:
450:
446:
442:
441:
436:
433:
431:
428:
426:
425:
421:
419:
416:
414:
411:
409:
406:
404:
401:
399:
396:
394:
391:
389:
386:
384:
381:
379:
376:
374:
371:
370:
369:
368:
364:
361:
360:
355:
352:
350:
347:
345:
342:
340:
337:
335:
332:
330:
327:
325:
322:
320:
317:
315:
312:
310:
307:
306:
305:
304:
301:
298:
297:
292:
289:
287:
284:
282:
279:
277:
274:
272:
269:
267:
264:
263:
262:
261:
258:
255:
254:
249:
246:
244:
241:
239:
236:
234:
231:
229:
226:
224:
221:
219:
216:
214:
211:
210:
209:
208:
205:
202:
201:
196:
193:
191:
188:
186:
185:Genetic (DNA)
183:
181:
178:
176:
175:Demonstrative
173:
171:
168:
166:
163:
161:
158:
156:
153:
151:
148:
146:
143:
142:
141:
140:
136:
135:
131:
127:
126:
123:
120:
119:
110:
107:
99:
88:
85:
81:
78:
74:
71:
67:
64:
60:
57: –
56:
52:
51:Find sources:
45:
41:
35:
34:
29:This article
27:
23:
18:
17:
1368:Evidence law
1346:. Retrieved
1342:
1333:
1325:
1322:
1318:
1310:
1292:. Retrieved
1288:
1279:
1271:
1252:. Retrieved
1248:
1213:
1204:
1196:
1180:
1149:
1118:. Retrieved
1114:
1092:
1081:. Retrieved
1077:
1041:
1038:
1014:. Retrieved
1010:
970:
966:
958:
953:
944:
933:. Retrieved
929:
920:
895:. Retrieved
891:
853:. Retrieved
849:
823:. Retrieved
819:
785:
776:
751:
743:
738:
723:
719:
717:
713:
704:
700:
691:
682:
678:
669:
665:
656:
646:
642:
640:
636:
626:
624:
619:
616:
610:
606:
604:
602:
592:
589:
569:
551:
531:authenticity
522:
516:
479:Criminal law
422:
248:Similar fact
217:
128:Part of the
102:
93:
83:
76:
69:
62:
50:
38:Please help
33:verification
30:
383:Confessions
334:Impeachment
223:Materiality
170:Inculpatory
165:Exculpatory
150:Documentary
1362:Categories
1348:2023-04-04
1294:2023-04-03
1254:2023-04-03
1120:2023-02-27
1083:2023-04-03
1016:2023-04-03
935:2023-02-20
897:2023-02-19
855:2023-02-19
825:2023-02-19
731:References
627:irrelevant
523:foundation
519:common law
445:common law
424:Res gestae
309:Competence
233:Spoliation
96:April 2023
66:newspapers
647:Old Chief
586:Relevance
572:objection
547:witnesses
543:testimony
539:admission
535:relevance
314:Privilege
300:Witnesses
238:Character
204:Relevance
145:Testimony
574:that an
553:Material
537:for the
527:evidence
465:Property
455:Contract
329:Redirect
122:Evidence
724:Daubert
529:of the
363:Hearsay
160:Digital
80:scholar
563:, and
443:Other
132:series
82:
75:
68:
61:
53:
580:trial
470:Wills
447:areas
243:Habit
87:JSTOR
73:books
533:and
521:, a
460:Tort
190:Lies
59:news
1323:See
1039:See
645:In
611:(b)
607:(a)
545:of
517:In
130:law
42:by
1364::
1341:.
1303:^
1287:.
1263:^
1247:.
1236:^
1222:^
1188:^
1157:^
1141:^
1129:^
1113:.
1101:^
1076:.
1063:^
1049:^
1025:^
1009:.
994:^
978:^
928:.
906:^
890:.
876:^
864:^
848:.
834:^
818:.
806:^
794:^
760:^
582:.
472:,
1351:.
1297:.
1257:.
1123:.
1086:.
1019:.
938:.
900:.
858:.
828:.
591:"
506:e
499:t
492:v
109:)
103:(
98:)
94:(
84:·
77:·
70:·
63:·
36:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
