YOUR NAME:
LESSON:
SOURCE:
Sarah McEahern
Mock Trial Rules of Evidence and Objections
Evidence Examples and Explanations by Arthur Best
(chapters 1, 3, 4, & 5) and Street Law Mock Trial Manual by
Patricia McGuire (pg. 18-19, 25)
TIME AND DAY TAUGHT: 50 minutes, May 8, 2014
MATERIALS:
PowerPoint presentation, Pop Quiz handout
I.
GOALS: Studying the rules of evidence and objections helps students:
A.
Understand how attorneys use evidence in court.
B.
Adhere to the rules during their mock trial.
II.
OBJECTIVES: As a result of this class, students will be better able to:
A.
Knowledge Objectives
1. Define “hearsay,” “speculation,” and “impeachment.”
2. State at least one purpose for the rules of evidence.
B.
Behavioral/Skills Objectives
1. Recognize leading questions, narration, irrelevant testimony, hearsay,
and opinions.
2. Make proper objections to violations of the rules of evidence.
3. Introduce physical evidence using proper procedure.
4. Impeach a witness using proper procedure.
C.
Attitude Objectives
1. Feel comfortable and confident making objections.
2. Appreciate the importance of following the rules of evidence.
III. CLASSROOM METHODS
A. Lecture on Objections using PowerPoint (15 minutes)
1. Explain to students that we will be learning about the rules of
evidence and some procedures used in trial to enforce the rules of
evidence, including objections.
2. Ask students why it is important to have the rules of evidence?
(fairness to the parties, prevent wasting time or resources of the
court/attorneys with irrelevant evidence, keep out evidence that is
unreliable or unfairly prejudicial)
3. Leading questions: emphasize to students that these questions cannot
be used during direct examination, but are acceptable, and even
encouraged during cross-examination.
i. Leading questions usually have yes or no answers.
4. Argumentative questions should be avoided. Students should not
argue with their witnesses, even if the witness provides an answer
that is unfavorable or wrong.
i. They can ask similar questions getting at a single, important
idea, but asking the exact same question over and over is not
effective.
ii. Tell the students they will be learning how to impeach
witnesses later in class for situations in which the witness lies.
5. Speculation arises when an attorneys asks the witness to speculate, or
make a guess about something. Calculated estimations within a
witness’s expertise, if established as an expert witness do not count
as speculation.
6. Narration is objectionable when a witness gives a long-winded answer
that goes far beyond the scope of the question. In general, witnesses
should only answer the question asked.
i. Attorneys may also object to questions that call for narration,
such as “Describe the night of May 31st”
7. Relevance prevents attorneys and witnesses from introducing
frivolous or prejudicial information that is unrelated to the issue at
hand. Only evidence that contributes to the understanding of the case
can be discussed.
8. Hearsay is a complicated rule, but in general, it prohibits the use of
out-of-court statements to prove facts. So, a witness cannot testify
about facts relayed to them by someone else.
i. In this example, the bartender’s statement cannot be used to
prove that the driver had been drinking all night.
ii. This is because the bartender is not the witness on stand, and
therefore the bartender’s credibility cannot be questioned
through cross-examination.
9. There are several hearsay exceptions, and we will be focusing on two
of them for our trial.
i. The first allows statements that are made about the event as it
was occurring that demonstrate what the speaker was
thinking, feeling, or intending in that moment. These
statements are used to prove the speaker’s state of mind
during the event, rather than facts of the event.
1. In this example, the statement suggests that the driver
was apologetic and was unaware of the light turning
red.
ii. The second exception allows statements that are made by one
of the parties in the case because the party, such as the
defendant, is in court and can deny or affirm that statement
during his or her own testimony.
10. First-Hand knowledge, much like hearsay, prevents witnesses from
relaying secondhand information. The witness cannot testify to
something unless the witness directly saw, heard, or experienced it
personally.
11. Opinions are typically reserved for expert witnesses, especially when
the opinion is about a scientific, technical, or specialized subject.
However, lay witnesses can give opinions that are rationally based on
observations within the common experience.
i. No witness can express an opinion on the ultimate issue of
the case.
12. Re-direct of a witness, which occurs after cross-examination, is
limited to the scope of cross-examination. So, an attorney cannot
bring up new topics during the re-direct.
i. In a real trial, the cross-examination is also limited by the
scope of the direct examination. If the opposing counsel
wants to bring up other topics, they would have to call that
witness to the stand themselves.
13. Beyond the scope of the packet. This objection is specific to mock
trial because the witnesses only have the information that is in the
packets. Witnesses can invent answers to questions that go beyond
the scope of the packet or add minor character details to get into the
role, but any facts that materially or significantly change the case
cannot be added.
i. The attorney can make this objection, but a witness can also
assert this if he or she doesn’t want to answer a question for
which the packet doesn’t provide an answer.
B. Pop Quiz (10 minutes)
1. Hand out Rules of Evidence Review to each student and instruct them
to work through each problem on their own. They should decide
whether the attorney or witness is violating the rules of evidence, and
if so, write down which objection they would make.
2. After everyone has completed the review, go through the answers as
a class asking students to explain their choices.
C. Practicing Cross-Examination with Objections-return to slides (10 minutes)
1. Explain to students that they can make objections when the opposing
attorney is questioning a witness or admitting evidence. They can
also object when a witness is giving an answer.
2. Instruct the students on how to make an objection in court.
i. They should stand up, address the judge by saying “Your
Honor,” stating which violation the attorney or witness is
making and defending the reasoning.
ii. The judge may give the questioning attorney a chance to
defend their question, evidence, or witness before making a
decision to sustain or overrule the objection.
iii. Sustaining the objection means that the judge agrees that a
violation has been made. Overruling the objection means that
the judge will allow the question, evidence or witness answer.
3. Ask a student attorney and witness pair to volunteer to demonstrate
their direct examination questions for the case you are preparing in
front of the class.
4. Instruct all other students to make objections when appropriate.
i. Remind students to stand up, address the judge, make their
objection and state their reasoning.
ii. Encourage student attorney to rephrase questions when they
are objectionable.
iii. Ask the class for suggestions to improve objectionable
questions.
D. Physical Evidence and Impeachment Procedures-return to slides (15 minutes)
1. Explain that physical evidence may include written documents,
diagrams, or other items involved in the issue. As the students what
physical evidence they can use in their trial (coroner’s diagram, map
of the scene, etc.)
i. First, an attorney must hand the evidence to the bailiff to be
marked as an exhibit.
1. "Your Honor, I ask that this record be marked for
identification as Prosecution Exhibit #1."
ii. Next, the attorney shows it to the opposing counsel, who can
object to the evidence.
iii. Then, the attorney builds a foundation for the evidence by
handing it to the witness, asking the witness if they recognize
it, and to explain what it is.
1. "Dr. Kowalski , do you recognize this report that is
marked as Prosecution Exhibit #1 for identification?"
iv. After the witness describes the evidence to the jury, the
attorney can ask other questions about the evidence.
v. Remind students that the jury and judge will not be able to
consider the physical evidence in their deliberations unless it
has been admitted into evidence.
1. "Your Honor, I offer this diagram for admission into
evidence as Prosecution Exhibit #1 and ask that the
Court admit it."
vi. The opposing counsel may object to the admission, and the
judge will decide whether to admit or refuse to admit the
evidence.
2. Group Activity: Divide class into groups of 4 to practice the
procedures.
i. Instruct students to take turns within their group introducing
a piece of physical evidence from the trial following the
instructions on the slide. One student will be the attorney
and the others will be opposing counsel, the witness, and the
judge.
ii. Next, have students practice impeaching a witness using their
mock trial witness statements.
E. Debrief: remind students of the importance of following the rules of evidence
to ensure a fair trial. They should keep the rules of evidence in mind
throughout preparation for the trial and make sure that the questions they
ask do not call for objections. Well-prepared attorneys anticipate objections
and can defend the choices they make in questions.
IV. EVALUATION
A. Student participation in discussion and group activity.
B. Written and verbal answers to Pop Quiz.
C. Demonstration of skills in small groups.
V. ASSIGNMENT
A. Tell students to review the direct and cross-examination questions they
have prepared for trial and make changes to avoid objectionable
questions and answers.
NAME:
Rules of Evidence Review
Decide whether the question or statement violated a rule of evidence. If so, which one?
1. Jason told me he stole his teacher’s car, and Jason is on trial for auto theft. I testify
to what he told me.
Y/N Objection_____________________________
2. During direct examination, the attorney asks the witness, “You were at school on
May 2nd, isn’t that true?”
Y/N Objection_____________________________
3. Marco is suing a police officer for alleged police brutality. During trial, he asks the
police officer if he is married. Y/N Objection_____________________________
4. Dr. Mac is a qualified orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Mac testifies that in her expert
opinion, the patient suffered a fracture in his leg. Y/N Objection_______________
5. Joe, the patient’s teacher, testifies: “In my opinion, the patient suffered from a
fracture in his leg.”
Y/N Objection_____________________________
6. Meghan has never been in the car with Evelyn or seen her driving. Meghan testifies
that Evelyn is a careless driver. Y/N Objection_____________________________
7. Calvin testifies that his friend told him the car behind them was going fast and the
driver wasn’t paying attention when he crashed. Y/N Objection______________
Rules of Evidence Review TEACHER’S GUIDE
Does the question or statement violate a rule of evidence? If so, which one?
1. Jason told me he stole his teacher’s car, and Jason is on trial for auto theft. I testify to what
he told me.
No. This falls under the hearsay exception because it is a statement made by a
party (Jason), and he can testify himself to affirm or deny his statement.
2. During direct examination, the attorney asks the witness, “You were at school on May 2nd,
isn’t that true?” Yes. This is a leading question because the attorney is leading the witness to
answer that the witness was at school on May 2nd. This could be rephrased, “Where were you
on May 2nd?”
3. Marco is suing a police officer for alleged police brutality. During trial, he asks the police
officer if he is married. Yes. This is objectionable on the basis of relevance. The police officer’s
marital status does not have anything to do with his police conduct.
4. Dr. Mac is a qualified orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Mac testifies that in her expert opinion, the
patient suffered a fracture in his leg. No. Dr. Mac is an expert, so her opinion on medical topics
is valid and can be given.
5. Joe, the patient’s teacher, testifies that the patient suffered from a fracture in his leg.
Yes. The witness is giving his opinion, and he is not an expert on medical injuries. He could
testify about what the leg looked like and his perception of the patient’s pain through
observation of the patient.
6. Meghan has never been in the car with Evelyn or seen her driving. Meghan testifies that
Evelyn is a careless driver. Yes. Meghan does not have first hand knowledge of Evelyn’s driving
habits, so she cannot testify.
7. Calvin testifies that his friend told him the car behind them was going fast and the driver
wasn’t paying attention when he crashed. Yes. This is hearsay. Calvin cannot use what his
friend said outside of court to prove that the driver wasn’t paying attention. He also does not
have first hand knowledge of this.