FACT GATHERING AND EVIDENCE QUIZ
33% OF GRADE
WRITE YOUR NAME ON THE ANSWER PAGE AND
ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS ON THE ANSWER PAGE.
CHOOSE 1 ANSWER PER QUESTION
1. Relevant evidence is:
A. Always Admissible
B. Evidence which has a 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.
C. May be excluded by the court.
D. B and C.
E. None of the Above.
2. Your boss, Ally McBeal, is representing the plaintiff in a discrimination case. Your key witness has just testified that your client was discriminated against, and the jury appeared to believe the witness. The defense attorney wants to introduce evidence of the witness’ character. Which of the following statements is/are true?
A. He may not introduce any character evidence because character evidence is never admissible for any purpose.
B. If the evidence to be introduced concerns the witness’ character for truthfulness he may prove it by opinion evidence.
C. If the evidence to be introduced concerns the witness’ character for truthfulness he may prove it by reputation evidence
D. B and C.
3. You represent the Defendant in a slip and fall (negligence) case. At 9:30 A.M. on March 3, 1999, Plaintiff slipped and fell on ice at the entrance to the Toys R Us store on Colorado Boulevard. Approximately 15 minutes later, the Defendant’s employees chipped off the ice and put salt down to melt the remaining ice. At trial, the plaintiff asks the store manager about the ice removal. You object. How should the court rule and why?
A. Overrule the objection since evidence of subsequent remedial measures is admissible to prove that the defendant was negligent.
B. Sustain the objection since evidence of subsequent remedial measures in not admissible to prove that the defendant was negligent.
D. All of the above.
E. None of the Above.
4. Under which of the following circumstances may the court exclude relevant evidence?
A. If it might mislead the jury.
B. If its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
C. If it would confuse the issues
D. All of the above.
5. Evidence that a Defendant has liability insurance;
A. Is admissible to prove liability in a negligence case.
B. Is admissible to prove liability in a products liability case.
C. Proves the defendant committed the crime.
D. A and B
E. None of the Above.
6. Ned the neo-nazi is on trial for attacking Robert the Rabbi. The attack is witnessed by Wilma, an assistant rabbi who was walking with Robert to her car in the parking lot at the time of the attack. The prosecution asks Wilma what her occupation is. Ned’s lawyer objects. How should the court rule.
A. Sustain the objection since a witness’ religious beliefs may not be used to attack or enhance the witness’ credibility.
B. Sustain the objection since the evidence is highly prejudicial to the Defendant.
C. Overrule the objection.
D. All of the Above
E. None of the Above.
8. Tom is on trial for breaking into a car and stealing a stereo. The only eyewitness to the crime is a 3-year-old child. The prosecution calls the child to the witness stand and wants to ask her what she saw. The defendant objects to having the child testify because she is incompetent. Should the court permit the child to testify.
A. No. Children under the age of 18 are never allowed to testify.
B. No. Because the evidence is more prejudicial than probative.
C. No. Because it Tom may retaliate against the child.
D. Yes. If the child promises to tell the truth and it can be demonstrated that the child knows what the truth is and can tell it.
9. Plaintiff Paul is hurt on a ride at Lakeside Amusement Park. Immediately after the accident, Lakeside transports him to their on-site medical care facility where he is treated for his injuries. Lakeside also offers to pay his medical bills for the follow-up care. Paul sues Lakeside and wants to offer evidence of their offer to pay his medical bills to show that Lakeside was at fault. Should the court let the evidence in?
A. Yes because it proves the defendant Lakeside was at fault.
B. Yes because it shows the defendant Lakeside’s corporate state of mind.
C. No because is forbidden by Colorado Rule of Evidence 411
D. No because it is forbidden by Colorado Rule of Evidence 409
10. In a criminal trial, the prosecution wants to call the trial judge as a witness. Can it do so and why?
A. No because a judge may not testify as a witness pursuant to Colorado Rule of Evidence 605.
B. Yes if the judge has personal knowledge
C. Yes, so long as the judge promises to tell the truth
D. B and C only.
E. None of the above.
11. What is true of writings used to refresh memory?
A. Writings may never be used to refresh memory.
B. Only original writings may be used to refresh memory.
C. Only handwritten documents may be used to refresh memory.
D. The court may require copies of the writings used to refresh memory be provided to the opposing party.
E. All of the above.
12. You are at a trial with your boss, Perry Mason. The prosecutor, Marcia Clark, objects to the testimony of your expert witness because the witness is not an expert. The judge agrees and forbids your expert from testifying. What should Perry do?
A. Make an offer of proof.
B. Nothing.
C. Object.
D. Ask the judge to remove the witness from the courtroom
E. None of the above.
13. If a proper foundation is established, a lay (non-expert) witness may give an opinion regarding.
A. The handwriting of a close friend.
B. The speed of a car she observed.
C. The chances that the plaintiff will make a full recovery from her injuries.
D. All of the above
E. A and B only.
14. Plaintiff is unhappy with the results of the elective nose surgery she had performed by Dr Ima Slasher. Plaintiff sues the doctor for malpractice in failing to warn her about the possible side effects from the surgical slashing. At trial the doctor cannot specifically recall advising the plaintiff regarding the side effects. The doctor’s attorney calls the doctor’s nurse to testify that the doctor routinely advises the patients verbally about the side effects. The plaintiff objects. The judge should admit the testimony if.
A. The nurse can be corroborated by another witness.
B. The nurse can testify that the doctor has each patient sign a written acknowledgement of surgical side effects and that the acknowledgement is notarized.
C. The nurse can testify that the doctor is very meticulous.
D. The nurse can testify that she works side-by- side with the doctor, that the doctor habitually warns patients of the side effects from elective surgery and that the nurse is unaware of any time that the doctor has failed to so warn her patients.-
15. Bill and Hillary are involved with an automobile accident with Newt. Bill is killed and Hillary sues Newt for mental anguish damages due to the death of her beloved husband. Hillary testifies that their marriage had never been better and that Bill was looking forward to being married to the next New York Senator. Newt seeks to call Monica to testify concerning statements Bill made to her during the course of the affair. Monica will testify that Bill said “As soon as I am done being President, I am going to divorce Hillary.” Hillary objects to this testimony. Newt argues that the statement is offered to prove that Hillary had marriage problems and to impeach her testimony. What should the court do?
A. Exclude the testimony since it is embarrassing and prejudicial to Hillary
B. Exclude the testimony because it is hearsay.
C. Exclude the testimony because it is irrelevant.
D. Admit the testimony since it is not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
16. Duplicate copies of documents
A. Are never admissible
B. Are admissible to the same extent as an original of a document
C. Only allowed in Civil trials.
D. Only allowed in Criminal Trials.
E. None of the Above.
17. Rhonda Roller Blader bungled her blading experience by bumping into Winnie Walker’s Poodle. Puppy after lingering insufferably did not survive the ordeal. Winnie sued Rhonda for the wrongful death of Puppy. Winnie sought damages for Puppy’s veterinary expenses. Rhonda has admitted liability. Therefore, the only issue at trial is the amount of damages that Rhonda must pay Winnie. Winnie’s lawyer attempts to introduce evidence that Rhonda was ogling another blader right before the accident. Rhonda’s attorney objects. Under the rules of evidence, the evidence that Rhonda was ogling another blader right before the accident is:
A. Admissible to prove the extent of Rhonda’s negligence.
B. Admissible to prove the force with which Puppy was flattened.
C. Inadmissible because Rhonda’s ogling is not probative of the flattening force on Puppy
D. Inadmissible because Rhonda’s ogling is irrelevant.
E. All of the Above
18. At a criminal trial, the defendant seeks to have all of the prosecution’s witnesses removed from the courtroom so they cannot hear the testimony of the other witnesses. The prosecution requested that the witnesses be allowed to stay and listen to the other witnesses prior to testifying. What should the court do?
A. Exclude the witnesses pursuant to Colorado Rule of Evidence 615.
B. Refuse to exclude the witnesses pursuant to Colorado Rule of Evidence 1006
C. A and B only.
D. All of the Above
E. None of the Above.
19. At a criminal trial, in which the defendant refuses to testify, the prosecution seeks to introduce the following statement, signed and sworn to by the Defendant.
“ I defendant, committed the murder for which I am charged. I was hired to
kill the victim, by his wife and I enjoyed doing it. She paid me for the job.”
The defendant objects to the introduction of this statement. Should the court admit the statement?
A. Yes because it is not hearsay.
B. No because it is hearsay and the defendant is present in the courtroom.
C. No because it would violate the defendant’s 5th amendment right against self incrimination.
D. None of the Above.
20. Your firm represents the plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit. The plaintiff has over 4000 pages of medical records. Your boss wants to introduce a summary of the medical records rather than the entire 4000 pages. The defendant objects. How should the court rule and why?
A. The court should refuse to admit the summary since it is not an original.
B. The court should refuse to admit the summary since it is not relevant
C. The court should admit the summary under Rule 1006.
D. All of the above.
ANSWER PAGE Name:
Multiple Choice
1. _____
2. _____
3. _____
4. _____
5. _____
6. _____
7. _____
8. _____
9. _____
10. _____
11. _____
12. _____
13. _____
14. _____
15. _____
16. _____
17. _____
18. _____
19. _____
20. _____
Correct Answers
X 5
Total Points __________________
