Question 1(1 point)

Which former Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court is responsible for establishing the commission that drafted the model rules of evidence?

Question 1 options:

John Marshall

John Roberts

Oliver Holmes

Earl Warren

Question 2(1 point)

In what year were the Federal Rules of Evidence enacted?

Question 2 options:

1965

1970

1975

1980

Question 3(1 point)

In what year were the Florida Rules of Evidence enacted?

Question 3 options:

1976

1979

1982

1985

General Provisions

Question 4(1 point)

Which of the following is official name of the chapter of laws establishing the rules of evidence?

Question 4 options:

The Florida Rules of Evidence

Florida Evidence Code

Act to Enable the Rules of Evidence

Rules of Evidence

Question 5(1 point)

When an attorney believes that a question or anticipated answer violates an evidentiary rule they should object and provide the name or number of the offended rule even if the jury is present.

Question 5 options:

TrueFalse

Question 6(1 point)

If the Judge sustains an objection the lawyer who asked the question should move on to another question rather than ask that the witness be permitted to answer to perfect the record.

Question 6 options:

TrueFalse

Question 7(1 point)

The Rules require that in certain circumstances the context of a statement must be offered contemporaneously by the offering party at the request of the opposing party.In which of the following scenarios would the court likely not require the offering party to provide the requested context?

Question 7 options:

A diary entry.

A video posted to facebook.

An email between an employer and employee.

A Police Officer's recollection of an interview.

Judicial Notice

Superior Soaps Corporation has sued a competitor, Krazy Klean, Inc., claiming that Krazy's advertisements falsely represent that Krazy's soap products are better for the environment than the products sold by Superior.

Assume for the purposes of this question that an advertisement is only actionable for false representations in Florida if the representation at issue is one of importance to the general public and likely to be relied upon by consumers.

Question 8(5 )

Can Superior Soaps request Judicial Notice of the fact that concern about the environment is common among the general public?Why or why not?Cite to any rules you believe are applicable to a

Question 8 options:

Question 9(5 points)

Krazy Klean claims as a defense that the main chemical in Superior's Soap products is poisonous to certain species of fish.How should the court respond to Krazy Klean's request for judicial notice of that fact?Why?Cite to any rules you believe are applicable.

Question 9 options:

Question 10(5 points)

Superior contends that the chemicals used in its products conform to FDA Regulations.Superior's lawyer files a written motion with the court to take judicial notice of the applicable FDA regulations.How should the court rule?What additional information is necessary, if any? Cite to any rules you believe necessary to fully answer this question.

Question 10 options:

Presumptions

Question 11(1 point)

The rules regarding presumptions are equally applicable in all actions, regardless of whether a case involves a civil issue or a criminal issue.

Question 11 options:

TrueFalse

Question 12(5 points)

A legal presumption exists that a death that appears to be from unnatural causes was the result of an accident rather than suicide.This presumption is especially important in litigation over benefits as many policies provide double coverage in the event of death by accident but no coverage in the event of a death by suicide.

James died after falling from a balcony in a condominium.His wife, Katherine, brings a suit against Consolation Insurance after Consolation refused to pay on the claim.Katherine is seeking the double benefits guaranteed under the policy in the event of an accidental death.Consolation is refusing to pay on the grounds that the death was the result of James committing suicide.

Bizarrely, at trial neither party offers any evidence about the cause of death that would support a finding of fact other than as already stated in this example.

How should the court rule on the plaintiff's motion for a directed verdict?Why?Cite to any rules you believe are applicable.

Question 12 options:

Relevance

Question 13(5 points)

Jason is accused of raping Tina after a super bowl party hosted at their friend Tim's house in Largo, Florida.At deposition Tina testified that Jason coerced her into having sex by saying "come with me and do what I say.I'm not kidding, I've already been to prison for rape, I'm not messing around."

Prior to trial Jason's attorney moves in limine for the court to rule the statement inadmissible.

a) Is Jason's alleged statement to Tina relevant?Why/why not? (5 points)

b) Assume the court determines that the statement is relevant, what rule of evidence might Jason's attorney rely upon to ask the court to exclude the statement? (5 points)

c) Would your analysis change if you learned Jason has never been to prison, or charged, with any crime?Why/Why not?

Question 13 options:

Question 14(1 point)

Relevant evidence is always admissible according to rule 90.402.

Question 14 options:

TrueFalse

Question 15(1 point)

Relevant evidence is nearly always prejudicial for one side or the other.

Question 15 options:

TrueFalse

Question 16(1 point)

Rule 403 only addresses evidence that is unfairly prejudicial when weighed against the probative value.

Question 16 options:

TrueFalse

Question 17(1 point)

Prior felony convictions are always relevant and can never be excluded under rule 90.403.

Question 17 options:

TrueFalse

Question 18(5 points)

For this multi-part question rely on these facts unless otherwise stated in the question:

Danielle was driving a 2014 Tesla Roadster when she crashed into Charisse who was stopped at a red light.Charisse sued Danielle for negligent driving, damages to her vehicle, and medical bills for a sprained back.In the back seat of Danielle's Tesla an iPad was located.

1) Is the presence of the iPad in the back seat, without anything further, relevant to Charisse's claim of negligence?Why/Why not?

2) Suppose the iPad was in a case or sleeve of some sort, but was found in the front passenger seat instead of the back.Is it relevant?Why/Why not?

3)Suppose the iPad was in the front seat, screen up, powered on, and a movie was playing when police arrived.Is it relevant?Why?Is the title of the movie relevant?Why/Why not?

4) Suppose that after the crash it was discovered that in addition to the movie playing there was also a detailed plan to murder Daniell's boss that same afternoon.Relevant? Why/Why not?

Question 18 options:

Question 19(5 points)

For the following multi-part question rely on these facts unless otherwise stated in the question:

Reed is arrested for sale of cocaine to and undercover police detective.After Reed's arrest, but before his trial, the detective is reassigned and demoted to a patrol unit for misconduct in another case.

1) Is the former detective's demotion relevant? Why/Why not?

2) Suppose the demotion was a consequence of the detective's use of illegal narcotics.Is the demotion and/or drug use relevant?Why/Why not?

3) Suppose the demotion was a consequence of the detective being suspected of planting evidence in another case 3 months before Reed's arrest.Is that misconduct relevant?What if it is alleged to occur3 months after?Why/Why not?

4) Suppose that the demotion was a consequence of the detective using racial slurs and Reed is a 24 year old Asian male.Relevant?Why/Why not?

Question 19 options:

Bonus Questions

Question 20(1 point)

What is the standard weight of a newly issued US Nickel?

Question 20 options:

Question 21(1 point)

What is the most interesting thing you have learned so far?

Question 21 options:

Question 22(1 point)

What are you most interested in learning about in the weeks to come?