Evidence Rules

These rules apply to proceedings in US courts.

These rules should be construed so as to administer every proceeding fairly, eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay, and to promote the development of evidence law, to the end of ascertaining the truth and securing a just determination.

A party may claim error in a ruling to admit or exclude evidence only if the error affects a substantial right of the party and:
1. If the ruling admits evidence, a party, on the record:
- timely objects or moves to strike; and
- states the specific ground, unless it was apparent from the context; or
2. If the ruling excludes evidence, a party informs the court of its substance by an offer of proof, unless the substance was apparent from the context

Once the court rules definitively on the record—either before or at trial—a party need not renew an objection or offer of proof to preserve a claim of error for appeal.

The court may make any statement about the character or form of the evidence, the objection made, and the ruling. The court may direct that an offer of proof be made in question-and-answer form.

To the extent practicable, the court must conduct a jury trial so that inadmissible evidence is not suggested to the jury by any means.

A court may take notice of a plain error affecting a substantial right, even if the claim of error was not properly preserved. A plain error is an error that is plain and obvious, can be corrected without an objection, can appeal based on plain error.

The court must decide any preliminary questions about whether a witness is qualified, a privilege exists, or evidence is admissible. In deciding, the court is not bound by evidence rules, except those on privilege.

Evidence is relevant if:
(a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and
(b) the fact is of consequence (meaning material) in determining the action

Relevant Evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise:
- the United States Constitution;
- a federal statute;
- these rules; or
- other rules prescribed the the Supreme Court
Irrelevant Evidence is not admissible

The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the folliowing: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.

If the court admists evidence that is admissible against a party for a purpose, but not against another party or for another purpose, the court, on timely request, must restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly.

(b) Kinds of Facts that May Be Judicially Noticed. The court may judicially notice a fact that is not subject to a reasonable dispute because it:
1. is generally known within the trial court’s territorial jurisdiction; or
2. can be accurately and readily determined form sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned

(b) When the relevance of evidence depends on whether a fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist. The court may admit the proposed evidence on the condition that the proof be introduced later.

(a) In General. To satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is.
(b) [Examples}

A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may consist of the witness’s own testimony. This rule does not apply to a witness’s expert testimony under Rule 703.

The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.

If a party introduces all or part of a statement, an adverse party may require the introduction, at that time, of any other part — or any other statement — that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time. The adverse party may do so over a hearsay objection.

(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of any other crime, wrong, or act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.
(2) Permitted Uses. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.
(3) Notice in a Criminal Case. In a criminal case, the prosecutor must:
-- (a) provide reasonable notice of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial, so that the defendant has a fair opportunity to meet it;
-- (b) articulate in the notice the permitted purpose for which the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence and the reasoning that supports the purpose; and
-- (c) do so in writing before trial — or in any form during trial if the court, for good cause, excuses lack of pretrial notice.

When measures are taken that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove:
- negligence
- culpable conduct
- a defect in a product or its design; or
- a need for a warning or instruction
But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as impeachment or – if disputed – proving ownership, control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures.

Evidence of furnishing, promising to pay, or offering to pay medical, hospital or similar expenses resulting from an injury is not admissible to priove liabliity for the injury.

(a) Prohibited Uses. In a civil or criminal case, evidence of the following is not admissible against the defendant who made the plea or participated in the plea discussions:
-- (1) a guilty plea that was later withdrawn;
-- (2) a nolo contendre plea;
-- (3) a statement made during a proceeding on either of those please under FRCP 11 or a comparable state procedure; or
-- (4) a statement made during plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority if the discussions did not result in a guilty plea or they resuled in a later withdrawn guilty plea

(b) Exceptions. the court may admit a statement descripted in Rule 410(a)(3) or (4):
-- (1) in any proceeding in which another statement made during the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced, if in fairness the statements out to be considered together; or
-- (2) in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement, if the defendant made the statement under oath, on the record, and with counsel present.

Evidence that a peston was or was not insured against liability is not admissible to prove wheter the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose such as proving a witness’s bias or prejudice or proving agency, ownership, or control.

The following definitions apply under this article:
(a) Statement: “statement” means a person’s oral assertion, written assertion, or nonverbal conduct, if the person intended it as an assertion.
(b) Declarant: “declarent” means the person who made the statement
(c) Hearsay: “hearsay” means as statement that:
the declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and
a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the after asserted in the statement

Hearsay is not admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise:
- a federal statute;
- these rules; or
- other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court

Hearsay within hearsay is not excluded by the rule against hearsay if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the rule.

A Declarant-Witness’s Prior Statement. The declarant testifies and is subject to cross examination about a prior statement, and the statement;
(a) is inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony and was given under penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition;
(b) is consistent with the declarant’s testimony and is offered:
-- (i) to rebut an express or implied charge that the declarant recently fabricated it or acted from a recent improper influence or motive in so testifying; or
-- (ii) to rehabilitate the declarant’s credibility as a witness when attacked on another ground; or
(c) identifies a person as someone the declarant perceived earlier

(d) A statement that meets the following conditions is not hearsay:
-- (1) The declarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination about a prior statement, and the statement:
---- (C) identifies a person as someone the declarant perceived earlier

(a) Showing or Disclosing the Statement During Examination. When examining a witness about the witness’s prior statement, a party need not show it or disclose its contents to the witness. But the party must, on request, show it or disclose its contents to an adverse party’s attorney.
(b) Extrinsic Evidence of a Prior Inconsistent Statement. Unless the court orders otherwise, extrinsic evidence of a witness’s prior inconsistent statement may not be admitted until after the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement and an adverse party is given an opportunity to examine the witness about it. This subdivision (b) does not apply to an opposing party’s statement under Rule 801(d)(2) .

(d) A statement that meets the following conditions is not hearsay:
-- (2) The statement is offered against an opposing party and:
---- (A) was made by the party in an individual or representative capacity;

(d) A statement that meets the following conditions is not hearsay:
-- (2) The statement is offered against the opposing party and:
---- (B) is one the party manifested that it adopted or believed to be true;

(d) A statement that meets the following conditions is not hearsay:
-- (2) The statement is offered against an opposing party and:
---- (C) was made by a person whom the party authorized to make a statement on the subject;
---- (D) was made by the party’s agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship and while it existed; or

(d) A statement that meets the following conditions is not hearsay:
-- (2) The statement is offered against an opposing party and:
---- (E) was made by the party’s coconspirator during and in furtherance of a conspiracy

A declarant is considered to be unavailable as a witness of the declarant:
(1) is exempted from testifying about the subject matter of the declarant’s statement because that court rules that a privilege applies
(2) refuses to testify about the subject matter despite a court order to do so;
(3) testifies to not remembering the subject matter
(4) cannot be present to testify at the trial or hearing because of death or a then-existing infirmity, physical illness, mental illness; or
(5) is absent from the trial or hearing and the statement’s proponent has not been able, by process or other reasonable means, to procure:
-- (A) the declarant attendance, in the case of a hearsay exception under Rule 804(b)(1) or (6); or
-- (B) the declarant’s attendance or testimony, in case of a hearsay exception under Rule 804(b)(2), (3), or (4)

The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay if the declarant is unavailable as a witness:
(1) Former Testimony ...
(2) Statement Under the Belief of Imminent Death ...
(3) Statment Against Interst ...
(4) Statement of Personal or Family History ...
(5) [Other Exceptions Transferred to Rule 807]
(6) Statement Offered Against a Party the Wrongfully Caused the Declarant's Unavailability.

The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness:
(1) Present Sense Impression. A statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it.

The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness:
(2) Excited Utterance. A statement relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement that it caused.

The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness:
(3) Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical Condition. A statement of the declarant’s then existing state of mind (such as motive, intent, or plan) or emotional, sensory, or physical condition (such as mental feeling, pain, or bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the validity or terms of the declarant’s will.

The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness:
(4) Statement Made for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment. A statement that:
-- (A) is made for — and is reasonably pertinent to — medical diagnosis or treatment; and
-- (B) describes medical history; past or present symptoms or sensations; their inception; or their general cause.

The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness:
(6) Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. A record of an act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis if:
-- (A) the record was made at or near the time by —or from information transmitted by — someone with knowledge;
-- (B) the record was kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a business, organization, occupation, or calling, whether or not for profit;
-- (C) making the record was a regular practice of that activity;
-- (D) all these conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness, or by a certification that compplies with Rule 902(11) or (12) or with a statute permitting certification and
-- (E) the opponent does not show that the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate a lack of truustworthiness.

The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness:
(8) Public Records. A record or statement of a public office if:
-- (A) it sents out
---- (i)the office’s activities;
---- (ii) a matter observed while under a legal duty to report, but not including, in a criminal, a matter-observed by law enforcement personnel; or
---- (iii) in a civil case or against the government in a criminal case, factual findings from a legally authorized investigation; and
-- (B) the opponent does not show that the source of information or other circumstances indicate a lack of trustworthiness

A document that bears no seal if:
-- (A) it bears the signature of an officer or employee of an entity named in Rule 902(1)(A); and
-- (B)another public officer who has a seal and official duties within the same entity certifies under seal — or its equivalent — that the signer has the official capacity and that the signature is genuine.

A copy of an official record — or a copy of a document that was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law — if the copy is certified as correct by:
-- (A) the custodian or another person authorized to maker certification; or
-- (B) a certificate that complies with Rule 902(1), (2), or (3), a federal statute, or a rule prescribed by the Supreme Court.

The original or a copy of a domestic record that meets the requirements of Rule 803(6) (A)-(C), as shown by a certification of the custodian or another qualified person that complies with a federal statute or a rule prescribed by the Supreme Court. Before the trial or hearing, the proponent must give an adverse party reasonable written notice of the intent to offer the record — and must make the record and certification available for inspection — so that the party has a fair opportunity to challenge them.

In a civil case, the original or a copy of a foreign record that meets the requirements of Rule 902(11) , modified as follows: the certification, rather than complying with a federal statute or Supreme Court rule, must be signed in a manner that, if falsely made, would subject the maker to a criminal penalty in the country where the certification is signed. The proponent must also meet the notice requirements of Rule 902(11).

(a) In General. Under the following conditions, a hearsay statement is not excluded by the rule against hearsay even if the statement is not admissible under a hearsay exception in Rule 803 or 804:
-- (1) the statement is supported by sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness—after considering the totality of circumstances under which it was made and evidence, if any, corroborating the statement; and
-- (2) it is more probable on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence that the proponent can obtain through reasonable effort.

Hearsay within hearsay is not excluded by the rule against hearsay if each part of the combined statements confirms with an exception to the rule.

When a hearsay statement — or a statement described in Rule 801(d)(2) (C), (D), or (E) — has been admitted in evidence, the declarant’s credibility may be attacked, and then supported, by any evidence that would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness. The court may admit evidence of the declarant’s inconsistent statement or conduct, regardless of when it occurred or whether the declarant had an opportunity to explain or deny it. If the party against whom the statement was admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party may examine the declarant on the statement as if on cross-examination.