Evidence Questions for Final

Murder prosecution. Defendant admits killing the victim but claims

self defense. The prosecutor shows the police officer who investigated
the murder a photo of the murder scene taken by a police
photographer showing the horribly mutilated victim laying in a pool of
blood and asks is this a fair and accurate representation of the scene
as you found it when you arrived? Answer: yes it is. The photo is:
◦ Admissible  (this is the correct answer because the
photo is relevant to the case)

At a burglary trial, the prosecution shows that prints from a particular

brand and size of shoe were found in the mud beneath the window
through which the intruder entered. The prosecution seeks to admit
testimony from the arresting officer that when he arrested the
defendant he searched the passenger compartment of the vehicle,
then on the floor of the passenger seat he found a pair of shoes the
same size of the intruder. Is the testimony of the arresting officer
admissible?
Yes, because the testimony tends to show that the defendant's
involvement is more probable than it would be without this
testimony

A singer used a new health supplement that purported to reduce the

amount of plaque in blood vessels. He suffered a heart attack. His
doctor told him that the health supp. Had increased rather than
decreased the amount of plaque in his blood vessels, thereby causing
the heart attack. The singer sued the company, the company defends
on the grounds that nothing in the product would have the effect of
increasing the amount of plaque in a person's blood vessels. At trial,
the singer calls a dr to testify that she had treated 12 other patients
who all experienced significant increases in plaque levels in blood
vessels after beginning to use the supplement. As all other health
factors were accounted for in these patients, the doctor concluded
that the supplement was the cause of each patient's plaque increase.
The company objects to the doctor's testimony. The court should
Admit the doctor's testimony because she can show a connection
between the increase in plaque in the patients' blood vessels and
their having taken the supplement

In a defamation action, the plaintiff offers the testimony of a witness

who will state that when she heard the defendant describe the
plaintiff as "the biggest shyster in town," she understood him to mean
that the plaintiff was an incompetent lawyer. The witness is the
eleventh person the plaintiff has called to interpret the quoted
statement. Should the witness's testimony be admitted?
No because its probative value is substantially outweighed by
needless presentation of cumulative evidence

Brown is tried for armed robbery of the first national bank. The
prosecution, in its case in chief, offers evidence that when brown was
arrested one day after the crime, he had a quantity of heroin and a
hypodermic needle in his possession. This evidence should be:
Excluded because its probative value is substantially outweighed by
the danger of unfair prejudice

Prosecution of D for robbing a liquor store. D's defense is that he was

at a colts game with his law frat at the time of the holdup. D calls 3 frat
members each of whom testifies that he was with D at the colts game
and that D never left his seat. D calls X, a 4th frat member, to testify to
the same info, but the prosecution objects, saying "your honor, this is
becoming cumulative." the court sustains the objection. D is convicted
and appeals this ruling. The appellate court should:
◦ Affirm on the basis that the trial court was within the
discretion under Rule 403 (correct because rule 403
gives the court the discretion to do this; he already
 presented the alibi defense. If the judge said
"you're not allowed to call any witness" then it
would have been a mistake)

A man sued a woman for injuries received in an auto collision. At trial,

the man called a dr who proposed to testify that 2 weeks after the
accident, the woman checked in to a rehab clinic for alcohol and
substance abuse. This evidence is:
--Inadmissible, because its probative value is outweighed by public
policy considerations

A student is arrested and charged with the arson of a local yoga

studio. At trial, the prosecution offers evidence that when the student
was arrested shortly after the crime was committed, he had a large
amount of heroin hidden in the side pouch of his motorcycle. The
student's attorney objects to the admission of this evidence. How
should the court rule?
The evidence should be excluded, because the probative value is
substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice

A therapist suffered a severe bout of bronchitis last year, the dr

prescribed 3 weeks of antibiotics. A pharmaceutical company
manufactures the antibiotics. A warning on the medicine's package
informed consumers that the drug could cause a loss of balance or
dizziness. After a few days off, the therapist went back to work and
continued taking the antibiotics as instructed. On his way to work one
day, shortly after taking his antibiotic, he was walking down the stairs
of his apartment building when he lost his balance and tumbled
forward, injuring his head and breaking his wrist. Hs attorney filed an
action against the pharmaceutical company in federal court, claiming
that the pharm company was negligent in its warning for the drug and
responsible for the therapist's injuries. At the trial, the therapist's
attorney sought to offer into evidence the fact that the pharm
company had expanded its warning label on the antibiotics this year
and that the new warning advised consumers not to walk around for
at least 2 hours after taking the medicine, because the medication
could cause a loss of balance or dizziness. Is this evidence admissible
to prove negligence?
◦ No because evidence of a new warning cannot be used
to prove negligence concerning the old warning

A housewife was driving home after her weekly manicure. She was
concerned about smearing her nail polish, because the big charity ball
was that evening. Suddenly, a transient ambled out into traffic. The
housewife could not stop in time, and she hit the transient. The
housewife was very anxious for the transient's safety. She immediately
rushed to his side. The transient's leg was obviously broken. The
transient promised to sue the housewife's pants off. The housewife
said, "I just did not see you… I was checking to see if my nails had
dried!" she then offered to pay for all of his medical expenses and give
him $5000 if he would agree not to sue her. The transient does not
accept the offer. At trial, his attorney attempts to offer evidence of the
housewife's first statement. The court should rule that the evidence is
◦ Inadmissible, as an admission made in connection with
an offer to pay medical expenses
◦ Inadmissible as an admission made in connection with
settlement negotiations
◦ Admissible, as an admission
◦ Admissible, as an admission made in connection with an
offer to pay medical expenses (this would have been
correct if she didn’t say the second part about $5k if
he agreed not to sue her)

• Personal injury action by Plaintiff, an apartment tenant,

against defendant, the landlord. Plaintiff fell on a dark set
of stairs leading from her second floor apartment to the
 first floor. There was only minimal lighting on the stairs at
the time of the accident. Defendant claims that given the
design of the stairwell, it was not possible to better
illuminate the area. Plaintiff takes the stand to testify that
a month after the accident, defendant installed more
lighting on the stairs.
c- inadmissible to prove negligence but admissible to prove the
feasibility of better lighting

A delivery driver went to a halloween party and drank heavily. While

he was driving home, his car swerved into the next lane and crashed
into a lawyer's car. The police arrived and cited the delivery driver
with misdemeanor driving under the influence (DUI). At the
preliminary hearing, the delivery driver initially pled guilty, but he later
withdrew his plea when the judge informed him of his sentence. The
judge then allowed the delivery driver to change his plea to not guilty.
Nevertheless the delivery driver was convicted. The lawyer now files a
civil suit against him for the lawyer's injuries from the accident and
moves to introduce evidence of the delivery driver's initial guilty plea.
The deliveryman objects. How should the court rule on the motion to
introduce evidence of the guilty plea?
The evidence is not admissible because the plea was later withdrawn