Writings and Authentication. Writing defined: FRE 1001(1) Evid. Code § 250 See also FRE (2)-(4)(defines photos, original and duplicate) and Evid. Code.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Lecture 4 Miiko Kumar. Re-examination Defined in dictionary Section 39 (a) A witness may be questioned about matters arising out of cross-examination.
Advertisements

CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION P. JANICKE Chap Authentication2 AUTHENTICATION A SUBSET OF RELEVANCE AUTHENTICATION EVIDENCE IS –NEEDED BEFORE DOCUMENTS.
Q UINCY COLLEGE Paralegal Studies Program Paralegal Studies Program Litigation and Procedure Discovery: Document Production and Control, Medical Exams,
Q UINCY COLLEGE Paralegal Studies Program Paralegal Studies Program Interviewing & Investigation Foundations of Investigating.
Criminal Evidence 6th Edition
Q UINCY COLLEGE Paralegal Studies Program Paralegal Studies Program Litigation and Procedure Discovery: Overview and Interrogatories Litigation and Procedure.
PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS FRE 801(d) Non Hearsay by definition Rule 801(d)(1) Prior Statement by Witness is not hearsay If declarant testifies and.
L.A. 310 – DISCOVERY PART II. Depositions C.C.P section 2025 Defined: Oral testimony taken (usually prior to trial) which is: –Under oath –Before a certified.
Evidence Professor Cioffi 3/2/2011 – 3/8/2011 Rule 901. Requirement of Authentication or Identification [Current Rule] a) General provision. The requirement.
Evidence Professor Cioffi 3/15/2011 – 3/16/2011.
Foundations for Documentary Evidence. Do Problem 52.
The Roles of Judge and Jury Court controls legal rulings in the trial Court controls legal rulings in the trial Jury decides factual issues Jury decides.
CJ227 Criminal Procedure Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 4 (Chapter 9 – Pretrial Motions, Hearings and Pleas) (Chapter.
Mock Trial Modified by Dennis Gerl from Evidence PPT by John Ed-Bishop
Evidence and Argument Evidence – The asserted facts that the arbitrator will consider in making a decision – Information – What is presented at the hearing.
Chapter 17 Videotapes, Photographs, Documents, and Writings as Evidence.
OPINION EVIDENCE. OPINION EVIDENCE FRE Evid. Code §§
Motion for Summary Judgment The Keys to Success. How does this work?  Summary judgments are governed by Rule 166(a) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
EVIDENCE Some Basics Spring Overview The cases you read involve facts and law Most often appellate courts decide legal issues based on the facts.
Discovery III Expert Witness Disclosure And Discovery Motions & Sanctions.
Trial advocacy workshop
MBA Mock Trial Program. What is a Mock Trial?  Trial before a real judge (or lawyer)  Held in real courtroom (State Court)  Examination of witnesses.
MODES OF DISCOVERY, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Legal Forms Group 3 Summary.
Rules on the Cross- examiner. General. Once a witness is called and sworn he is subject to cross, even if called for the sole purpose of producing a document.
Basic Evidence and Trial Procedure. Opening Statement  Preview the evidence “The evidence will show”  Introduce theme  Briefly describe the issues,
The Trial Process and the Investigator as a Witness.
© 2005 by Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved.1 CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION DEPOSITIONS.
Mon. Nov. 26. Work Product “Privilege” A witness, X, who is friendly to the D was interviewed by P’s attorney and a statement was drawn up Is there any.
DISCOVERY. Types of Discovery Depositions Interrogatories Requests for Admissions Subpoena duces tecum Request for Physical Examination Request for Witness.
Courtroom Protocol and Technology
LAW OF COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY FALL 2015 © 2015 MICHAEL I. SHAMOS Computer Evidence Michael I. Shamos, Ph.D., J.D. Institute for Software Research School.
Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication LA 310.
Criminal Evidence 6th Edition Norman M. Garland Chapter 12 Documentary Evidence And the Right of Discovery.
1 PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE Learning Domain PURPOSE FOR THE RULES OF EVIDENCE Protect the jury from seeing or hearing evidence that is: (w/b p. 1-3)
Authentication & Identification Laying the foundation that something is what it purports to be.
CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION Prof. JANICKE Chap Authentication2 AUTHENTICATION A SUBSET OF RELEVANCE AUTHENTICATION EVIDENCE IS –NEEDED BEFORE.
Real and Demonstrative Evidence Big Difference – Requires a Testimonial Basis to be Admitted.
Interrogatories & Depositions Civil Litigation I - Unit 6.
AJ 104 Crime Scene Evidence, Experiments, and Models.
United States v. Safavian United States District Court District of Columbia November 29, 2010 Jonathan Weiner.
ACOS 1, 2 Legal Aspects of Investigation The investigator and the legal system.
© 2010 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
“ Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2008 Criminal Evidence Chapter Twelve: Documentary and Scientific Evidence This multimedia product and its contents are protected.
CHAP. 14: BEST EVIDENCE RULE Prof. JANICKE Chap Best Ev. Rule2 APPLIES ONLY TO: WRITINGS PHOTOGRAPHS RECORDINGS.
ARKANSAS LEGAL AID OCTOBER 17, 2013 BY MICHAEL JOHNSON AND PAULA CASEY EXHIBITS.
CJ305 Criminal Evidence Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 9 (Chapter 12 – Documents and the Right of Discovery) (Chapter.
1 Law of Evidence Mark Pollitt Associate Professor.
CHAP. 14: BEST EVIDENCE RULE Prof. JANICKE Chap Best Ev. Rule2 APPLIES ONLY TO: WRITINGS PHOTOGRAPHS RECORDINGS.
PROCEDURES IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, 8 th ed. Roberson, Wallace, and Stuckey PRENTICE HALL ©2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ
Mock Trial Team Strategies and Formalities. Opening Statements 3 minutes Objective – Acquaint court with the case and outline what you are going to prove.
CJ227: Criminal Procedure Unit 6 Seminar Mary K Cronin.
Hugh Finkelstein Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney 20 th Judicial District of Arkansas.
CIVIL PROCEDURE FALL 2003 SECTION F CLASS 22/23 DISCOVERY IV.
Wyoming Statutes §§ through
CHAP. 14: BEST EVIDENCE RULE
Forensic and Investigative Accounting
CHAP. 14: BEST EVIDENCE RULE
Criminal Evidence 7th Edition
CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION Prof. JANICKE 2018.
CHAP. 14: BEST EVIDENCE RULE
Law of Evidence DOCUMENTRY EVIDENCE 30/11/2014.
EVIDENCE—BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS
OBJECTIONS.
Principles of Evidence
CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION Prof. JANICKE 2016.
Chapter 17 Videotapes Photographs Documents Writings.
EVIDENCE—BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS
CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION P. JANICKE 2010.
CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION Prof. JANICKE 2019.
CHAP. 14: BEST EVIDENCE RULE
Presentation transcript:

Writings and Authentication

Writing defined: FRE 1001(1) Evid. Code § 250 See also FRE (2)-(4)(defines photos, original and duplicate) and Evid. Code §§ 255(original) & 260 (duplicate)

Writings and Authentication Generally, three objections to a writing: 1. authentication 2. best or secondary evidence rule 3. hearsay

Writings and Authentication Authentication When a writing is offered in evidence, the proponent must also offer enough evidence to permit the judge to find that the writing is what the proponent says it is

Writings and Authentication Authentication Authentication is a rule of relevancy The role of the judge is limited The judge must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the proponent If there is sufficient evidence to allow a reasonable jury to find the writing to be what the proponent says it is, the judge must allow the jury to decide the issue of authenticity of the writing (“it goes to the weight, not the admissibility”) FRE 901 and Evid. Code § 1400

Writings and Authentication Authentication Authentication serves 3 purposes: Establishes relevance Assures genuineness Gives context

Writings and Authentication Authentication The requirement of authentication applies to all tangible items of evidence E.g. knife, gun, photos, the defective product, tape recording, video tape, diagram etc

Writings and Authentication methods of authenticating:( FRE 901(b)) Testimony of witness with knowledge; Non-expert opinion on handwriting; Expert testimony on comparison; Trier of fact comparison; Distinctive characteristics; Voice identification Telephone conversations Public records Ancient documents or data Process or system Method approved by statute or rule

Writings and Authentication methods of authenticating: ( Evid.Code §§ ) Witness to execution of writing Acting upon writing as authentic By handwriting evidence by maker By person familiar with handwriting of maker By comparison by factfinder By expert witness comparison By evidence of reply By content By acknowledged writing By official seal

Writings and Authentication Authentication of Photos, Movies, Video Tapes, Audio Tapes, Maps, Diagrams and Computer Reconstructions Requirement that the item must be an accurate depiction This requirement is relative to the issue on which it is relevant:  e.g. if diagram is offered to show how many houses are between cite and corner, a rough, not to scale drawing may be admissible  Alternatively, if photo is offered to show view witness had out of the window on to crime scene, where photo taken in spring shows leaves on tree blocking view when crime occurred in winter – photo may not be admissible  Issues may include, time of day, lighting conditions, angle of camera, view of camera lens

Writings and Authentication Authentication of Photos, Movies, Video Tapes, Audio Tapes, Maps, Diagrams and Computer Reconstructions Probative vs. prejudicial effect, danger of confusion Gruesome photos Cumulative Edited portions of audio or video tapes Relative scale of diagrams, maps and reconstructions

Writings and Authentication Authenticating Real and Demonstrative Evidence Real evidence: tangible objects that played a part in the events that are the subject of the trial Demonstrative evidence: usually visual aids which help finder of fact understand the evidence presented (models, maps, diagrams, charts, photos, video tapes, demonstrations, reasonable facsimiles)

Writings and Authentication Authenticating Real and Demonstrative Evidence Evidence must be relevant Probative value must outweigh countervailing factors in FRE 403 or Evid. Code § 352 Usually, compliance with requirement of authentication will satisfy relevance Re: demonstrative evidence – relationship between its accuracy and its probative value

Writings and Authentication Demonstrations and Experiments Must be relevant Probative value must outweigh prejudice/confusion DUI FSTs example DUI FSTs defense video tape example Accident reconstruction Firearms identification testing

Writings and Authentication Chain of Custody A process of authentication of real evidence presented to the finder of fact E.g. how do we prove that the drugs seized from defendant are the same drugs that were tested by the crime lab and that both of those are the same drugs being offered into evidence now Describe how chain is kept Marking method Gaps in chain go to the weight, not the admissibility unless affirmative evidence of tampering

Writings and Authentication The Best Evidence Rule FRE 1002: to prove the content of a writing, recording or photo, the original writing, recording or photo is required except as otherwise provided by these rules or Act of Congress This rule applies only when proponent seeks to prove contents of a writing This rule means that you cannot prove the contents of a writing by testimony recounting the contents or by use of a copy

Writings and Authentication Best Evidence Rule FRE 1001(3) defines “original” to include: Counterpart intended, by person executing writing or recording, to have same effect as original; Printout of computer data, if readable by sight, and shown to accurately reflect data, is an original

Writings and Authentication Best Evidence Rule FRE 1001(4) defines “duplicate” to mean: A counterpart produced by the same impression as the original by photographic, mechanical, electronic, chemical or equivalent techniques which accurately reproduce the original; FRE 1003: “duplicate” admissible unless: genuine question as to authenticity of original; or Unfair to admit duplicate under the circumstances

Writings and Authentication Best Evidence Rule Hypo: plaintiff calls physician to testify about injuries from car accident; Dr. testifies about treatment, including the taking of x-rays; Dr. begins testimony about what x-rays showed. Objection: failure to comply with best evidence rule What should ruling be?

Writings and Authentication Best Evidence Rule So, what does prohibition on use of copy mean?

Writings and Authentication Best Evidence Rule – Exceptions FRE 1004 (1) original lost or destroyed (unless by proponent bad faith) (2)original not obtainable by any judicial process (3) original in possession of opponent; requires:  notice (that contents of original would be subject of proof at hearing) and  failure (of opponent to produce original) (4) collateral matter – the writing is not closely related to a controlling issue

Writings and Authentication Best Evidence Rule – Exceptions FRE 1005 – contents of an official record may be proved by a copy (official entity keeps originals and will only provide copies) FRE 1006 – summaries of the contents of voluminous documents, written or oral; (original must be available for inspection) FRE 1007 – if opponent admits contents of a writing, then party does not have to produce the original; admission must be in testimony or deposition or by written admission (unsworn oral admission does not meet Rule 1007)

Writings and Authentication Secondary Evidence Rule Evid. Code § 1521 – the contents of a writing may be proved by admissible secondary evidence, unless: A genuine dispute exists concerning material terms of the writing; Admission of secondary evidence would be unfair; Subject to § 1523 (bar on oral testimony to prove contents of writing); Authentication is still required

Writings and Authentication Secondary Evidence Rule Evid. Code § 1522– additional grounds for exclusion of secondary evidence: Proponent is in control of original and has not made it available for inspection Exceptions to this section: Does not apply to a duplicate Does not apply to a writing not closely related to controlling issues in the action Does not apply to a writing in the custody of a public entity

Writings and Authentication Secondary Evidence Rule Evid. Code § 1523 – generally, oral testimony is not admissible to prove the content of a writing Exceptions: Proponent does not have a copy of writing and the original is lost or destroyed (w/o proponent fraud) Proponent does not have a copy or original, and: can’t get writing by court process or other means, or, writing not closely related controlling issues and it would be inexpedient to require its production Writing consists of numerous accounts or other writings that cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and evidence sought is only the general result of the whole

Writings and Authentication Secondary Evidence Rule Evid. Code §§ – rules applicable to official records – creates presumption of accuracy of writing Evid. Code §§ – rules applicable to photographic copies – creates presumption of accuracy of writing These presumptions serve some of the same functions as authentication

Writings and Authentication Evid. Code §§ – rules applicable to subpoenas duces tecum – to make it easier for custodians of business records to comply with compelled records requests Requires custodian of records to provide affidavit attesting to authenticity of records and accuracy of copies provided– affidavit may be received for the truth of the matters stated in the affidavit

Writings and Authentication Best and Secondary Evidence Rules: Remember, in addition to these rules and their exceptions, the requirements of authentication and the hearsay rule apply when one seeks to prove the contents of a writing.

Writings and Authentication Rule of Completeness FRE 106 – when a writing is introduced by a party, an adverse party may introduce any other part or any other writing which in fairness ought to be considered contemporaneously where part of act, statement, or writing offered by one party, the whole on the same subject may offered by opponent (letter read, answer may be given, etc.) Evid. Code § 356 where part of act, statement, or writing offered by one party, the whole on the same subject may offered by opponent (letter read, answer may be given, etc.) Difference: FRE does not apply to conversations Difference: FRE does not apply to conversations