Quiz
Evidence
Fragen in diesem Quiz (5)
1Among other reasons, the Federal Rules of Evidence restrict the types of evidence admitted to
- Aensure evidence is sufficiently reliable
- Bto ensure absolutely no delay is tolerated
- Cto protect juries from misleading information
- Dall of the above
- Eone and three
2Tom and Jerry got into a fight at a local bar, and Jerry ended up beating Tom so badly that Tom was taken to a hospital. Jerry is prosecuted for assault. At trial, he admits to the assault but claims he was acting in self- defense and that Tom started the fight after having drunk too many beers. In his defense, Jerry wishes to introduce evidence that on three prior occasions in the past week, Tom had drunk too much in the bar and picked a fight with another patron. The prosecution objects, pointing out that Jerry had not been present for any of these prior occurrences and had no knowledge of Tom's propensity for violence at the time of the alleged assault. The evidence of Tom's three prior fights is:
- AIrrelevant, since Jerry had no knowledge of the fights at the time of the alleged assault.
- BRelevant, but only if the judge determines that Jerry does not have a similar history of getting into fights when drunk.
- CIrrelevant, since the judge may conclude that Tom's supposed propensity for violence would lead the jury to automatically conclude that he was the aggressor.
- DRelevant, since a person who tends to get violent when he drinks is more likely to start a fight than a person who does not.
3Henry is suing Susan in a wrongful death action for Henry's wife Florence. Henry alleges that Florence was a passenger in Susan's car, and that Susan was driving 90 miles an hour down an icy road, lost control of the car, hit the side of an overpass. This collision caused Florence to fly through the windshield, resulting in fatal injuries. Henry offers into evidence several photographs which show Susan's car with a mangled front end and graphic bloodstains on the inside of the windshield. Henry claims the extensive damage to Susan's car tends to prove how quickly Susan was driving, and that the bloodstains and the hole in the windshield help to prove cause of death. Susan's attorney objects under Rule 403. She states that she is willing to stipulate that Susan was traveling at 90 miles per hour, and also to the fact that Florence was killed by being thrown through the windshield as a result of the collision. How do you rule?
- ASustain the objection, since a stipulation which proves the same fact in consequence is superior to graphic evidence which carries a risk of prejudice.
- BSustain the objection, because courts follow a general rule to exclude bloody or otherwise violent images from a jury's consideration.
- COverrule the objection, since the photos carry no risk of prejudice and are relevant.
- DOverrule the objection, since the probabtive value of the photos are not substantially outweighed by their unfair prejudice.
4Viola and Antonio collide while skateboarding at the local Skate Park. Both of their skateboards are totalled, and both parties are injured. The day after the collision, Antonio gives Viola a brand new skateboard. The next week, Viola sues Antonio for negligence, and at trial she seeks to testify that Antonio gave her a new skateboard the day after the event. Antonio objects. The judge should:
- APreclude the evidence under Rule 401, since it is irrelevant.
- BPreclude the evidence under Rule 403.
- CPreclude the evidence under Rule 408.
- DAdmit the evidence.
5George was driving down Highway 33 when a herd of cattle stampeded across the road in front of him. He struck one of the cows and totaled his car. He then sued the state for maintaining an unsafe road. Two days later, the state erects a number of signs along the road, warning drivers of the cow crossing. Two weeks after that, the landowner (who is a not a party to the case) puts up a fence along the road to prevent the cows from wandering into traffic. At trial, the state expert testifies that although the state has an easement on the land running alongside the road which allows the state to place signs on the property, it has no legal right to erect a barrier of any kind. The state expert concedes on cross-examination that warning signs might make the road slightly safer, but argues that the road is adequately safe without signs and points out that there were no prior accidents involving cars striking cows on the highway. On rebuttal, the plaintiff's attorney seeks to admit evidence of the signs and the fence erected after the accident. The judge should:
- APreclude evidence of both.
- BAdmit evidence of both.
- CPreclude evidence of the signs, but perhaps admit evidence of the fence.
- DPreclude evidence of the fence, but perhaps admit evidence of the signs.
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- Quiz am Evidence , erstellt von Kelsey Luttrell am 01/04/2019.
- Autor
- Kelsey Luttrell
- Sprache
- English
- Aufrufe
- 0
- Bewertung
- Noch keine Bewertungen Bewerte dieses Quiz