Federal Rules of Evidence, 2005
(Mock Trial version)
For purposes of mock trial competition, the Rules of Evidence have been modified and simplified. They are based on the Federal Rules of Evidence and its numbering system.
Where rule numbers or letters are skipped, those rules were not deemed applicable to mock trial procedure. Text in italics or underlined represents simplified or modified language.
Not all judges will interpret the Rules of Evidence (or procedure) the same way, and mock trial attorneys should be prepared to point out specific rules (quoting, if necessary) and to argue persuasively for the interpretation and application of the rule they think appropriate.
The Mock Trial Rules of Competition and the Wisconsin High School Mock Trial Federal Rules of Evidence govern the Wisconsin High School Mock Trial Tournament.
Article I. General Provisions
Article II. Judicial Notice
Article III. Presumptions in Civil Actions and Proceedings
Article IV. Relevancy and its Limits
Article IV. Relevancy and its Limits
Article V. Privileges
Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony
Article VIII. Hearsay
ARTICLE IX. Authentication and Identification
ARTICLE X. Contents of Writing, Recordings and Photographs
ARTICLE XI. Miscellaneous Rules
Article I. General Provisions
Rule 101. Scope
These Wisconsin High School Mock Trial Federal Rules of Evidence govern the trial proceedings of the Wisconsin High School Mock Trial Tournament.
Rule 102. Purpose and Construction
These Rules are intended to secure fairness in administration of the trials, eliminate unjust delay, and promote the laws of evidence so that the truth may be ascertained.
Article II. Judicial Notice
Not applicable
Article III. Presumptions in Civil Actions and Proceedings
Not applicable
Article IV. Relevancy and its Limits
Rule 401. Definition of "Relevant Evidence"
"Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
Rule 402. Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible: Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible
All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided in these Rules. Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.
Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time
Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, if it confuses the issues, if it is misleading, or if it causes undue delay, wastes time, or is a needless presentation of cumulative evidence.
Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes
(a) Character Evidence. -- Evidence of a person's character or character trait, is not admissible to prove action regarding a particular occasion, except:
- Character of accused -- Evidence of a pertinent character trait offered by an accused or by the prosecution to rebut same;
- Character of victim -- Evidence of a pertinent character trait of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor;
- Character of witness -- Evidence of the character of a witness as provided in Rules 607,
608 and 609.
(b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts -- Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove character of a person in order to show an action conforms to character. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.
Rule 405. Methods of Proving Character
(a) Reputation or opinion -- In all cases where evidence of character or a character trait is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation, or in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination, questions may be asked regarding relevant, specific conduct.
(b) Specific instances of conduct -- In cases where character or a character trait is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, proof may also be made of specific instances of that person's conduct.
Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice
(1) Admissibility. Evidence of the habit of a person or the routine practice of an organization, whether corroborated or not and regardless of the presence of eyewitnesses, is relevant to prove that the conduct of the person or organization, on a particular occasion, was in conformity with the habit or routine practice.
(2) Method of Proof. Habit or routine practice may be proved by testimony in the form of an opinion or by specific instances of conduct sufficient in number to warrant a finding that the habit existed or that the practice was routine.
Rule 410. Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements
Except as otherwise provided in this Rule, evidence of the following is not, in any civil or criminal proceeding, admissible against a defendant who made the plea or was a participant in the plea discussions:
- a plea of guilty which was later withdrawn;
- a plea of nolo contendere;
- any statement made in the course of any proceeding under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or comparable state procedure regarding either of the forgoing pleas; or
- any statement made in the course of plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority which do not result in a plea of guilty, or which result in a plea of guilty that is later withdrawn.
However, such a statement is admissible (i) in any proceeding wherein another statement made in the course of the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced and the statement ought, in fairness, be considered with it, or (ii) in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement if the statement was made by the defendant under oath, on the record and in the presence of counsel.
Article V. Privileges
Rule 501. General Rule
There are certain admissions and communications excluded from evidence on grounds of public policy. Among these are:
communications between husband and wife;
communications between attorney and client;
communications among grand jurors;
secrets of state; and
communications between psychiatrist and patient.
Article VI. Witnesses
Rule 601. General Rule of Competency
Every person is competent to be a witness.
Rule 602. Lack of Personal Knowledge
A witness may not testify to a matter unless the witness has personal knowledge of the matter.
Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the witness' own testimony. This rule is subject
to the provisions of Rule 703, related to opinion testimony by expert witnesses. [See Rule 2.2.]
Rule 607. Who may Impeach
The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling the witness.
Rule 608. Evidence of Character and Conduct of Witness
(a) Opinion and reputation evidence of character. - The credibility of a witness may be attacked or supported by evidence in the form of opinion or reputation, but subject to these limitations: (1) the evidence may refer only to character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, and (2) evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the character of the witness for truthfulness has been attacked by opinion or reputation evidence, or otherwise.
(b) Specific instances of conduct. - Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting the witness' credibility, other than conviction of crime as provided in Rule 609, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence. They may, however, in the discretion of the Court, if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, be asked on cross-examination of the witness (1) concerning the witness' character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or (2) concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of another witness as to which character the witness being cross-examined has testified.
Testimony, whether by an accused or by any other witness, does not operate as a waiver of the accused's or the witness' privilege against self-incrimination with respect to matters related only to credibility.
Rule 609. (For 2005, please use 906.09 instead of this rule. 906.09 is provided in the case materials.) Impeachment by Evidence of Conviction of Crime (This rule applies only to witnesses with prior convictions.)
(a) General Rule. - For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that a witness other than the accused has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from the witness or established by public record during cross-examination, but only if the crime was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year, and the Court determines that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to the accused.
Evidence that any witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if it involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the punishment.
(b) Time Limit. - Evidence of a conviction under this Rule is not admissible if a period of more than ten years has elapsed since the date of the conviction or of the release of the witness from the confinement imposed for that conviction, whichever is the later date, unless the Court determines that the value of the conviction substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect. However, evidence of a conviction more than 10 years old as calculated herein, is not admissible unless the proponent gives to the adverse party sufficient advance written notice of intent to use such evidence to provide the adverse party with a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidence.
Rule 610. Religious Beliefs or Opinions
Evidence of the beliefs or opinions of a witness on matters of religion is not admissible for the purpose of showing that by reason of their nature the witness' credibility is impaired or enhanced.
Rule 611. Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation
(a) Control by Court. - The Court shall exercise reasonable control over questioning of witnesses and presenting evidence so as to (1) make the questioning and presentation effective for ascertaining the truth, (2) to avoid needless use of time, and (3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
(b) Scope of cross examination. - The scope of cross examination shall not be limited to the scope of the direct examination, but may inquire into any relevant facts or matters contained in the witness' statement, including all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those facts and matters, and may inquire into any omissions from the witness statement that are otherwise material and admissible.
(c) Leading questions. -- Leading questions should not be used on direct examination of a witness (except as may be necessary to develop the witness' testimony). Ordinarily, leading questions are permitted on cross examination. When a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party, leading questions may be used.
(d) Redirect/Recross. -- After cross examination, additional questions may be asked by the direct examining attorney, but questions must be limited to matters raised by the attorney on cross- examination. Likewise, additional questions may be asked by the cross examining attorney on recross, but such questions must be limited to matters raised on redirect examination and should avoid repetition.
Rule 612. Writing Used to Refresh Memory
If a written statement is used to refresh the memory of a witness either while or before testifying, the Court shall determine that the adverse party is entitled to have the writing produced for inspection. The adverse party may cross-examine the witness on the material and introduce into evidence those portions which relate to the testimony of the witness.
Rule 613. Prior Statements of Witnesses
Examining witness concerning prior statement. - In examining a witness concerning a prior statement made by the witness, whether written or not, the statement need not be shown nor its contents disclosed to the witness at that time, but on request the same shall be shown or disclosed to opposing counsel.
Extrinsic evidence of prior inconsistent statement of witness. - Extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement by a witness is not admissible unless the witness is afforded an opportunity to explain or deny the same and the opposite party is afforded an opportunity to interrogate.
Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony
Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witness
If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness' testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness' testimony or the determination of a fact in issue.
Rule 702. Testimony by Experts
If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise.
Rule 703. Bases of Opinion Testimony by Experts
The facts or data upon which an expert bases an opinion may be those perceived by or made known to the expert at or before the hearing. If of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the field in forming opinions or inferences, the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence.
Rule 704. Opinion on Ultimate Issue
(a) Opinion or inference testimony otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an issue to be decided by the trier of fact.
(b) In a criminal case, an expert witness shall not express an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused.
Rule 705. Disclosure of Facts or Data Underlying Expert Opinion
The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give reasons therefore without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data, unless the Court requires otherwise. The expert may in any event may be required to disclose the underlying facts or data on cross-examination.
Article VIII. Hearsay
Rule 801. Definitions
The following definitions apply under this article:
(a) Statement. -- A "statement" is an oral or written assertion or nonverbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by the person as an assertion.
(b) Declarant. -- A "declarant" is a person who makes a statement.
(c) Hearsay. -- "Hearsay" is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
(d) Statements which are not hearsay. -- A statement is not hearsay if:
(1) Prior statement by witness. -- The declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross examination concerning the statement and the statement is (A)
inconsistent with the declarant's testimony, and was given under oath subject
to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition, or (B) consistent
with the declarant's testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of
recent fabrication or improper influence or motive, or (C) one of identification of a person made after perceiving the person; or
(2) Admission by a party-opponent. -- The statement is offered against a party and is (A) the party's own statement
in either an individual or a representative capacity or (B) a statement of which the party has manifested an adoption or belief
in its truth, or (C) a statement by a person authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject, or (D) a statement
by the party's agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the
relationship, or (E) a statement by a co-conspirator of a party during the course in furtherance of the conspiracy.
Rule 802. Hearsay Rule
Hearsay is not admissible, except as provided by these rules.
Rule 803. Hearsay Exceptions, Availability of Declarant Immaterial
The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule, even though the declarant is available as a witness:
(1) Present sense impression. -- A statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter.
(2) Excited utterance. -- A statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition.
(3) Then existing mental, emotional, or physical conditions. -- A statement of the declarant's then existing state of mind, emotion, sensation, or physical condition (such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain, and bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the execution, revocation, identification, or terms of declarant's will.
(4) Statements for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment. -- Statements made for the purpose of medical diagnosis or treatment.
(5) Recorded Recollection. -- A memorandum or record concerning a matter about which a witness once had knowledge but now has insufficient recollection to enable the witness to testify fully and accurately, shown to have been made or adopted by the witness when the matter was fresh in the witness' memory and to reflect that knowledge correctly.
(6) Records of regularly conducted activity. -- A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, unless the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. The term "business" as used in this paragraph includes business, institution, association, profession, occupation, and calling of every kind, whether or not conducted for profit.
(18) Learned treatises. -- To the extent called to the attention of an expert witness upon cross examination or relied upon by the expert witness in direct examination, statements contained in published treatises, periodicals, or pamphlets on a subject of history, medicine, or other science or art, established as a reliable authority by the testimony or admission of the witness or by other expert testimony or by judicial notice.
(21) Reputation as to character. -- Reputation of a person´s character among associates or in the community.
(22) Judgment of previous conviction. -- Evidence of a judgment finding a person guilty of a crime punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year, to prove any fact essential to sustain the judgment, but not including, when offered by the government in a criminal prosecution for purposes other than impeachment, judgments against persons other than the accused.
Rule 805. Hearsay within Hearsay
Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of the combined statement conforms with an exception to the hearsay rule provided in these rules.
ARTICLE IX. Authentication and Identification
Not applicable
ARTICLE X. Contents of Writing, Recordings and Photographs
Not applicable
ARTICLE XI. Miscellaneous Rules
Rule 1103. Title.
These rules may be known and cited as the Wisconsin High School Mock Trial Tournament Federal Rules
of Evidence.
|
