Deck 4: Types of Evidence

Question 1

If the defense wants a presumption to be used, it must prove the basic fact.

Answer 1

True

Question 2

Judicial notice is not required if the parties enter into a stipulation.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

A presumption is an inference that jurors are told they must draw.

Answer 3

True

Question 4

Real evidence refers to physical objects.

Question 5

Relevant evidence includes any evidence that tends to prove (or disprove) a disputed fact in the case.

Question 6

If the attorneys stipulate to a fact, no evidence will be introduced at trial about that fact.

Question 7

If there has been a stipulation to a fact, the prosecution will not be allowed to introduce any testimony about that fact.

Question 8

Testimonial evidence includes all statements made to the police.

Question 9

All relevant evidence is material.

Question 10

A conviction cannot be based entirely on circumstantial evidence.

Question 11

Relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of misleading the jury.

Question 12

Direct evidence establishes a fact without an inference.

Question 13

Corroborative evidence merely restates facts already introduced into evidence.

Question 14

All relevant evidence is admissible

Question 15

In a criminal trial, jurors cannot base their verdict on stipulations.

Question 16

Circumstantial evidence relies on inferences to establish facts.

Question 17

A judge takes judicial notice only if an attorney has requested it.

Question 18

The judge may take judicial notice of any commonly known fact.

Question 19

When the defendant enters a plea of "Not Guilty," all facts needed to establish the crime are placed "at issue."

Question 20

Cumulative evidence may be excluded even though it is relevant.

Question 21

An inference is:

A) a conclusion that the judge tells the jurors that they must draw.
B) a fact that is assumed to have happened if the basic fact was established.
C) a conclusion that is drawn about the person who is testifying.
D) a logical conclusion drawn from the facts introduced into evidence.

Question 22

In order to qualify as testimonial evidence, the statement must be:

A) made under oath.
B) contain no hearsay.
C) be a first-hand observation.
D) all of these are required

Question 23

An example of corroborative evidence would be:

A) testimony of two witnesses whose description of the scene to almost identical.
B) a fact that is established by the use of a rebuttable presumption.
C) a fact that is established when the judge took judicial notice.
D) real (physical) evidence that supports the testimony of a witness.

Question 24

If the defense introduces evidence on the basic fact in order to establish a conclusive presumption, the prosecution should:

A) disprove the basic fact.
B) disprove the presumed fact.
C) disprove either the basic fact or the presumed fact.
D) ask that the jury be instructed that presumptions cannot be used in criminal cases.

Question 25

The Federal Rules of Evidence mandate that a judge take judicial notice of:

A) facts that can be readily determined from a source whose accuracy is beyond dispute.
B) any fact that both sides request that the judge take notice of.
C) facts that have been established by the testimony of two or more witnesses.
D) all of these

Question 26

"Limited admissibility" means that evidence:

A) is of limited value because the witness has a prior conviction.
B) can be used to prove misdemeanors but not felonies.
C) can be used to prove one fact but not another.
D) none of these are correct

Question 27

If the defense introduces evidence on the basic fact in order to establish a rebuttable presumption, the prosecution should:

A) disprove the basic fact.
B) disprove the presumed fact.
C) disprove either the basic fact or the presumed fact.
D) ask that the jury be instructed that presumptions cannot be used in criminal cases.

Question 28

The prosecution is allowed to use presumptions to establish that the defendant is guilty:

A) only if the prosecution establishes the presumed fact by a preponderance of the evidence.
B) only if the prosecution established the basic fact by a preponderance of the evidence.
C) only if the prosecution establishes the presumed fact beyond a reasonable doubt.
D) only if the prosecution establishes the basic fact beyond a reasonable doubt.

Question 29

The difference between direct and circumstantial evidence is:

A) direct evidence requires the use of an inference but circumstantial evidence does not.
B) circumstantial evidence requires the use of an inference but direct evidence does not.
C) direct evidence requires judicial discretion but circumstantial evidence is not.
D) circumstantial evidence requires the use of a presumption but direct evidence does not.

Question 30

In order to have a stipulation:

A) attorneys for both sides must agree on the stipulated fact.
B) more than one witness must testify that the stipulated fact exists.
C) the physical item stipulated to must be produced at trial.
D) the stipulation must be in writing and signed by the judge.

Question 31

The most common reason for an attorney to agree to a stipulation is:

A) save time at trial.
B) it would be hard to find a witness to testify about the fact.
C) opposing counsel could easily prove the fact.
D) the stipulation is required by law.

Question 32

Cumulative evidence:

A) restates what another witness has already testified about.
B) applies when physical evidence validates testimonial evidence.
C) proves the same fact as a prior witness but by another means.
D) none of these are correct.

Question 33

Which of the following would be direct evidence in a murder case?

A) DNA test that establishes that the defendant's blood was found at the crime scene
B) testimony of an expert witness that there is a 1 in 3 million chance that the DNA found at the scene could have come from someone other than the defendant
C) testimony of police officer describing the confession the defendant made
D) testimony of eyewitness describing the defendant shooting the victim

Question 34

When a piece of evidence is referred to as "material," "material" means:

A) it is relevant and more than remotely connected to the fact.
B) it is relevant to an important fact in the case.
C) the prosecution cannot win a conviction without this piece of evidence.
D) relevant and material are synonymous - any fact that is relevant is also material.

Question 35

An item of evidence introduced by the prosecution at trial has probative value if:

A) it proves a fact without the need for additional evidence.
B) it proves a fact with the use of an inference.
C) it makes it appear that a fact probably occurred.
D) it must do all of these in order to have probative value.

Question 36

Testimonial evidence refers to:

A) statements made while testifying under oath.
B) affidavits.
C) depositions.
D) all of these

Question 37

Something is "at issue" in a trial if it relates to:

A) any disputed element of a crime that is charged.
B) any act of the defendant after the allege crime occurred.
C) any other crime committed by the defendant.
D) any prior conviction of the defendant .

Question 38

A judge can take judicial notice:

A) of any fact introduced at trial.
B) only if an attorney requests that the judge take judicial notice of a fact.
C) of any relevant fact that is "commonly known" in the scientific community.
D) judges can take judicial notice in civil cases but not criminal cases

Question 39

The defendant had a minor felony conviction, but did not commit any crimes for 20 years after that. She is now on trial for an unrelated type of crime. The felony conviction is not admissible because:

A) the evidence is material but not relevant.
B) the evidence is cumulative evidence.
C) the evidence is corroborative evidence.
D) the prejudicial impact on the jury outweighs its probative value.

Question 40

The term "real evidence" refers to:

A) physical objects.
B) documents.
C) photographs.
D) all of these

Question 41

Define direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. Explain the differences between them.

Question 42

Ricky has been charged with grand theft for stealing a $1,000 diamond ring.The police investigator found the following:
· Mike claims he saw Ricky take the ring from a display case at a jewelry store;
· Nate, a clerk at the jewelry store, reported the ring missing two minutes after Ricky left the store;
· Owen, the owner of a pawn shop, claims Ricky tried to pawn a ring one hour after Nate reported it missing;
· Patty, Ricky's former girlfriend, claims she threw her engagement ring in Ricky's face when they broke up two years ago. Which would be considered direct evidence?

A) Mike's testimony that he saw the theft occur.
B) Nate's testimony that he discovered the ring was missing.
C) Owen's testimony the Rick tried to pawn a ring.
D) Patty's testimony that she threw a ring at Ricky.

Question 43

Define relevant evidence .When is relevant evidence admissible in court?  When is relevant evidence NOT admissible in court?

Question 44

Sam is sitting in a courtroom doing an assignment for his evidence class. He hears Paul, the Prosecutor, and Dick, the Defense Attorney, talking to Judge John:
· Paul asked the judge to accept a stipulation that the defendant had a prior conviction. Dick denied that the defendant had ever been convicted before.
· Dick asked the judge to take judicial notice of the fact that it was daylight at 10 a.m. on June 5.
· Paul asked the judge to instruct the jury on a presumption. Dick objected on the grounds that Paul had not established the basic fact beyond a reasonable doubt. Should Judge John inform the jury about the stipulation?

A) Yes, the prosecution has the right to enter stipulations in criminal trials.
B) Judge John should accept the stipulation only if he believes it is true.
C) Judge John should reject Paul's request for a stipulation because Dick did not agree to it.
D) Judge John should reject Paul's request for a stipulation because stipulations are unconstitutional in criminal cases.

Question 45

Mary is on trial for child abuse. Devin, Mary's defense attorney, has interviewed the following witnesses:
· Larry, Mary's brother who lives 500 miles away and has not visited Mary since June of last year, who states that he has never seen Mary abuse her children.
· Kathy, Mary's15-year-old babysitter, who claims that she saw the children's father hit them with a belt on March 1.
· Julie, a nurse at the clinic where Mary takes the children for medical care, who reported that the children came in for an appointment on March 2 and had bruises that she suspected were inflicted with a belt
· Isabel, a social worker for Children's Protective Services (CPS), who testified at a civil court hearing on a petition filed against Mary by CPS, that on March 10 she saw numerous bruises in different stages of healing on the children.
· Henry, Mary's boyfriend, who insists he saw the children's father hit them with a belt on March 1. What testimony would be considered cumulative?

A) Larry's statement that he believes what Mary said.
B) Kathy's statement that she saw the same thing Henry saw.
C) Julie and Isabel's statements that the children had numerous bruises.
D) None of these would be cumulative evidence.

Question 46

Sam is sitting in a courtroom doing an assignment for his evidence class. He hears Paul, the Prosecutor, and Dick, the Defense Attorney, talking to Judge John:
· Paul asked the judge to accept a stipulation that the defendant had a prior conviction. Dick denied that the defendant had ever been convicted before.
· Dick asked the judge to take judicial notice of the fact that it was daylight at 10 a.m. on June 5.
· Paul asked the judge to instruct the jury on a presumption. Dick objected on the grounds that Paul had not established the basic fact beyond a reasonable doubt. Should Judge John give a jury instruction about the presumption as requested by Paul?

A) Yes, the prosecution is allowed to introduce presumptions in criminal cases as long as there is some basis in fact for them.
B) Yes, as long as Dick has an opportunity to introduce evidence to disprove the presumed fact.
C) No, Dick is correct. The prosecution must establish the basic fact beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal cases.
D) No, presumptions are unconstitutional in criminal cases.

Question 47

Ricky has been charged with grand theft for stealing a $1,000 diamond ring.The police investigator found the following:
· Mike claims he saw Ricky take the ring from a display case at a jewelry store;
· Nate, a clerk at the jewelry store, reported the ring missing two minutes after Ricky left the store;
· Owen, the owner of a pawn shop, claims Ricky tried to pawn a ring one hour after Nate reported it missing;
· Patty, Ricky's former girlfriend, claims she threw her engagement ring in Ricky's face when they broke up two years ago. What would provide the best corroboration for Mike's testimony?

A) Nate's testimony that the display case was empty after Ricky left the store.
B) Owen's testimony that Ricky tried to pawn a ring.
C) Patty's testimony that Mike was not present when she threw her engagement ring at Ricky.
D) Mike's testimony cannot be corroborated unless Ricky takes the stand and confesses.

Question 48

Ricky has been charged with grand theft for stealing a $1,000 diamond ring.The police investigator found the following:
· Mike claims he saw Ricky take the ring from a display case at a jewelry store;
· Nate, a clerk at the jewelry store, reported the ring missing two minutes after Ricky left the store;
· Owen, the owner of a pawn shop, claims Ricky tried to pawn a ring one hour after Nate reported it missing;
· Patty, Ricky's former girlfriend, claims she threw her engagement ring in Ricky's face when they broke up two years ago. Which item would be considered real evidence?

A) Mike's testimony that he saw the theft occur.
B) The ring that Ricky tried to pawn.
C) Patty's testimony that Ricky gave her an engagement ring.
D) Nate's testimony that the ring was not in the display case after Ricky left the store.

Question 49

Explain the difference between cumulative evidence and corroborative evidence and give an example of each.

Question 50

List three (3) types of substitutes for evidence and explain their use in court. Why are substitutes for evidence used in the courtroom?

Question 51

Sam is sitting in a courtroom doing an assignment for his evidence class. He hears Paul, the Prosecutor, and Dick, the Defense Attorney, talking to Judge John:
· Paul asked the judge to accept a stipulation that the defendant had a prior conviction. Dick denied that the defendant had ever been convicted before.
· Dick asked the judge to take judicial notice of the fact that it was daylight at 10 a.m. on June 5.
· Paul asked the judge to instruct the jury on a presumption. Dick objected on the grounds that Paul had not established the basic fact beyond a reasonable doubt. Should Judge John take judicial notice that it was daylight at 10 a.m.?

A) Yes, the hours of daylight are facts that can be accurately determined from a reliable source.
B) Only if Dick brings in an almanac or other reliable reference source for the judge to read.
C) Only if Dick brings in an expert meteorologist who was in the area on June 5 and can testify that the sun was shining.
D) No, judicial notice is not allowed in criminal cases.

Question 52

Explain the use of testimonial evidence. Give two (2) examples of testimonial evidence that do not involve a witness testifying during a trial.

Question 53

Mary is on trial for child abuse. Devin, Mary's defense attorney, has interviewed the following witnesses:
· Larry, Mary's brother who lives 500 miles away and has not visited Mary since June of last year, who states that he has never seen Mary abuse her children.
· Kathy, Mary's15-year-old babysitter, who claims that she saw the children's father hit them with a belt on March 1.
· Julie, a nurse at the clinic where Mary takes the children for medical care, who reported that the children came in for an appointment on March 2 and had bruises that she suspected were inflicted with a belt
· Isabel, a social worker for Children's Protective Services (CPS), who testified at a civil court hearing on a petition filed against Mary by CPS, that on March 10 she saw numerous bruises in different stages of healing on the children.
· Henry, Mary's boyfriend, who insists he saw the children's father hit them with a belt on March 1. Whose testimony is most likely to be ruled immaterial?

A) Larry, because he has had no contact with Mary when the events at issue occurred.
B) Kathy because she is a minor.
C) Julie because she did not see anyone hit the children.
D) Henry because he is probably biased in favor of his girlfriend.

Question 54

Ricky has been charged with grand theft for stealing a $1,000 diamond ring.The police investigator found the following:
· Mike claims he saw Ricky take the ring from a display case at a jewelry store;
· Nate, a clerk at the jewelry store, reported the ring missing two minutes after Ricky left the store;
· Owen, the owner of a pawn shop, claims Ricky tried to pawn a ring one hour after Nate reported it missing;
· Patty, Ricky's former girlfriend, claims she threw her engagement ring in Ricky's face when they broke up two years ago. Nate's testimony would be considered circumstantial evidence because:

A) if believed, it makes it more probable that Ricky stole the ring.
B) the judge gave the jury an instruction on limited admissibility.
C) the jury must draw an inference before they can conclude that Ricky stole the ring.
D) it only establishes the theft if the parties stipulate to his testimony.

Question 55

Mary is on trial for child abuse. Devin, Mary's defense attorney, has interviewed the following witnesses:
· Larry, Mary's brother who lives 500 miles away and has not visited Mary since June of last year, who states that he has never seen Mary abuse her children.
· Kathy, Mary's15-year-old babysitter, who claims that she saw the children's father hit them with a belt on March 1.
· Julie, a nurse at the clinic where Mary takes the children for medical care, who reported that the children came in for an appointment on March 2 and had bruises that she suspected were inflicted with a belt
· Isabel, a social worker for Children's Protective Services (CPS), who testified at a civil court hearing on a petition filed against Mary by CPS, that on March 10 she saw numerous bruises in different stages of healing on the children.
· Henry, Mary's boyfriend, who insists he saw the children's father hit them with a belt on March 1. What would be considered testimonial evidence?

A) All of these would be testimonial evidence.
B) Larry's statement made during a telephone call to Devin.
C) Julie's notes in the children's medical records.
D) Isabel's statements made at the civil court hearing.