When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. California Evidence Code - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Evidence_Code

    The California Evidence Code (abbreviated to Evid. Code in the California Style Manual) is a California code that was enacted by the California State Legislature on May 18, 1965 [1] to codify the formerly mostly common-law law of evidence. Section 351 of the Code effectively abolished any remnants of the law of evidence not explicitly included ...

  3. Federal Rules of Evidence - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Evidence

    First adopted in 1975, the Federal Rules of Evidence codify the evidence law that applies in United States federal courts. [1] In addition, many states in the United States have either adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence, with or without local variations, or have revised their own evidence rules or codes to at least partially follow the federal rules.

  4. Objection (United States law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objection_(United_States_law)

    In the law of the United States of America, an objection is a formal protest to evidence, argument, or questions that are in violation of the rules of evidence or other procedural law. Objections are often raised in court during a trial to disallow a witness 's testimony , and may also be raised during depositions and in response to written ...

  5. Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_consistent...

    Note that under California Evidence Code ("CEC") §§769, 770, and 1235, prior inconsistent statements may be used for both impeachment and as substantive evidence, even if they were not originally made under oath at a formal proceeding, as long as "the witness was so examined while testifying as to give him an opportunity to explain or to deny ...

  6. Old Chief v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Chief_v._United_States

    Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997), discussed the limitation on admitting relevant evidence set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Under this rule, otherwise relevant evidence may be excluded if the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, or considerations of undue delay ...

  7. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsus_in_uno,_falsus_in...

    Although Edward Law, 1st Baron Ellenborough (pictured) rejected a categorical application of the rule falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus for English courts in the year 1809, the doctrine survives in some American jurisdictions. [1] Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is a Latin [2] maxim [3] meaning "false in one thing, false in everything". [4]

  8. Evidence (law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_(law)

    Federal Rule 403 allows relevant evidence to be excluded "if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice", if it leads to confusion of the issues, if it is misleading or if it is a waste of time. California Evidence Code section 352 also allows for exclusion to avoid "substantial danger of undue prejudice."

  9. Outline of evidence law in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outline_of_evidence_law_in...

    Evidence law in the United States – sets forth the areas of contention that generally arise in the presentation of evidence in trial proceedings in the U.S. Relevance [ edit ]