Rules 701 706 (Opinion Testimony by Lay Witness and Opinion Testimony by Experts, Ultimate Issue, Disclosure of Facts

s and Underlying Data, Court Appointed Experts) 20-1. Opinion and testimony by lay witness is admissible if: a. The opinion or inference does not require a special knowledge, skill, experience or training; the witness cannot otherwise adequately tell what he or she has seen or heard and the opinion will not prejudice the objecting party by being misleading to the trier of fact b. The opinion or inference does not require a special knowledge, skill, experience or training c. The opinion will not prejudice the objecting party by being misleading to the trier of fact d. Both b and c 20-2. In recent years the lay opinion rule has been relaxed considerably because: a. There is difficulty in a witness testifying fully and accurately without blurring the concepts of fact and opinion b. The education and intelligence level of witnesses has greatly improved since World War II primarily because of the computer c. Attorneys have learned to spend more time coaching witnesses with regard to lay testimony prior to trial d. All of the above 20-3. According to TRE 701 as amended July 1, 1996, lay witnesss testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to opinions or inferences which are: a. Rationally based on the perception of the witness b. Helpful to a clear understanding of the witnesss testimony or the determination of a fact in issue c. Necessary because the witness cannot otherwise adequately tell what he or she has seen or heard d. Only a and b 20-4. Following the 1996 amendment to TRE 701, the Tennessee Rule: a. Is the same as the Federal rule regarding lay testimony concerning opinion or inference b. Is more restrictive than the Federal rule regarding lay witness testimony concerning lay witness opinion and inference testimony c. Is more expansive than the Federal rule by permitting a witness to testify about the value of the witnesss own property or services d. a and c

20-5.

In order to testify about a persons mental condition or sanity, a lay witness: a. b. c. d. Need only have had a brief opportunity to observe someone May need more than a brief opportunity to observe someone Must have had sufficient knowledge on which to express a reliable opinion Must be based on an evaluation of the persons usual activities and personal interactions

20-6.

A lay opinion as to insanity: a. b. c. d. Requires a factual foundation Does not require a factual foundation Requires knowledge of reputation in the community Is limited to the rules regarding character witnesses

20-7.

The foundation necessary to permit a lay witness to opine as to a persons soundness of mind should include: a. Details regarding reputation in the community b. Details of conversations, appearances, conduct or other particular facts based on personal knowledge. c. Details concerning whether the party is licensed to drive an automobile, licensed to sell real estate or insurance or licensed to conduct marital counseling or case mediation d. All of the above

20-8.

In order for lay testimony to be admissible regarding physical condition, the witness must be: a. b. c. d. Able to testify without relying upon medical expertise Able to testify on matters that the ordinary individual is capable of evaluating Unable to testify without expressing an opinion a and b

20-9.

A lay witness may testify with proper foundation: a. b. c. d. That a person was drunk or insane That a substance appeared to be blood About an obvious cause of death All of the above

20-10. If an extensive factual foundation is laid, lay opinion testimony regarding the value of real or personal property is admissible: a. b. c. d. By the owner By a lessee By a bailee All of the above

20-11. Expert witnesses usually are: a. The fact witness, such as the treating physician who observed the plaintiffs injury b. The fact witness who also has opinion testimony, such as the treating physician who projects necessary future treatment and permanent disability c. The expert who has no personal knowledge of the facts but has an opinion regarding the technical aspect of the issue d. All of the above 20-12. The threshold question for determining whether the opinion testimony of an expert witness is admissible is whether the testimony: a. b. c. d. Will substantially assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence Will substantially assist the trier of fact to determine a fact in issue Will substantially assist the trier of fact to evaluate the character of a party a and b

20-13. The word substantially in TRE 702 demonstrates an intent to implement: a. b. c. d. A more lenient standard than is contained in the Federal rule A more stringent standard than is contained in the Federal rule The same standard that is contained in the Federal rule A different standard than is contained in the Federal rule

20-14. TRE 702 permits expert testimony if: a. The testimony substantially assists the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue b. The subject calls for scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge c. The testimony can be of limited assistance to the trier of fact on a very important issue d. Both a and b 20-15. Legislators and other people involved with the enactment of legislation: a. Are by statute qualified to testify about the intent of a statute b. May not testify about the legislatures intent in passing the laws sometime in the past c. May construe a law previously enacted if they have expertise and experience with a piece of legislation d. May testify about oral or written statements that are part of the legislative history of a law

20-16. Regarding qualifications to be an expert witness, which of the following statements is true: a. A person may be qualified as an expert witness because of more training or experience than the average person b. The expert witness must have such superior skill, experience, training, education or knowledge within the particular area that his or her degree of expertise is beyond the scope of common knowledge and experience of the average person c. To be an expert the witness must be well-known and have published a treatise on the subject of the testimony d. The expert witness, if a medical doctor, must be board certified 20-17. The expert witness: a. Need not be from the immediate physical area where the testimony is offered b. Is usually required to be from the immediate physical area where the testimony is offered c. Except in medical and legal malpractice cases, need not be from the immediate physical area where the testimony is offered d. Must have had sufficient experience in drinking alcoholic beverages in the local area to be able to testify that a person was drunk 20-18. In determining whether a witness qualifies as an expert: a. b. c. d. The court is given broad discretion The court is given narrow discretion The court must meet a specific standard set out by the rules The court may not consider a stipulation by the parties

20-19. The form and method of interrogation of expert witnesses: a. b. c. d. Is the same as for lay witnesses Is different than for lay witnesses Requires hypothecation Is determined by common law

20-20. In Tennessee an experts opinions: a. Are conclusive b. Are advisory in character c. Should be given only such weight as the trier of fact deems appropriate in light of the facts in evidence d. b and c 20-21. An experts testimony on a contested issue: a. b. c. d. Must be absolute Must be conclusive Must substantially assist the trier of fact Must leave no reasonable doubt about the issue with the trier of fact

20-22. Pursuant to TRE 703, an expert may base his or her opinion: a. b. c. d. On information from a number of sources On facts that would not be admissible in court On facts of a type other similar experts reasonably rely upon All of the above

20-23. An expert witness may base his or her testimony: a. b. c. d. On facts or data perceived by the expert at or before the hearing On facts or data made known to the expert at or before the hearing On facts or data that are not admissible into evidence, but are reliable All of the above

20-24. If an expert bases an opinion on evidence that is not independently admissible, the trial judge should: a. b. c. d. Prohibit the jury from hearing the foundation of the testimony Deliver a cautionary instruction to the jury Give the other party time to secure a rebuttal expert witness a and b

20-25. There are several limits on the type of data available to an expert, such as: a. b. c. d. The data must be of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field The data cannot be from an untrustworthy source Data can be excluded by Rule 403 All of the above

20-26. If opinion or inference testimony embraces the ultimate issue of the lawsuit, it is not inadmissible if rendered by: a. b. c. d. An expert witness A lay witness A lay or expert witness with some limitations A lay or expert witness

20-27. TCA 39-11-501: a. Permits expert testimony as to whether a defendant was or was not insane in a criminal case b. Precludes expert testimony as to whether a defendant was or was not insane in a criminal case c. Precludes expert testimony regarding observations, test results and diagnoses regarding criminal defendants d. Precludes lay testimony unless based on a proper foundation

20-28. TRE 705, based on FRE 705: a. Bars hypothetical questions of experts b. Does not require hypothetical questions of experts c. Permits an expert opinion or inference on direct examination without disclosing the facts underlying the opinion or inference d. b and c 20-29. Possibly the best option to present expert opinion testimony is to: a. Use the hypothetical question approach b. Have the expert on direct examination state the information upon which the conclusion is based c. Have the expert give the conclusion without giving the underlying data on direct examination d. Use a learned treatise instead of an expert 20-30. Disclosure of independently inadmissible evidence relied upon in expert opinion: a. b. c. d. Is not required by TRE 705 Is required by TRE 705 Works in conjunction with the provisions of TRE 703 a and c

20-31. TRE 706 clearly rejects the Federal approach and: a. Permits unlimited discretion to appoint experts to testify as the courts witness b. Places severe limits on a Tennessee trial judges capacity to appoint an expert to testify as the courts witness c. Restricts the judges capacity to select a court-appointed witness not approved by the parties d. b and c 20-32. TRE 706 has restricted court-appointed experts because: a. The use of a court-appointed expert removes an element of control from the lawyers b. Alters the traditional role of the American judge as a neutral referee and substitutes the role of the judge as investigator c. The judges expert will be given more credence by the trier of fact than the partys expert d. All of the above 20-33. In a non-jury trial, the court should appoint an expert witness only: a. When the court is dissatisfied with the proof presented by the party b. When the experts fees will be substantial in proportion to the amount at issue c. When the proof does not otherwise adequately support the conclusion desired by the court d. a and b

20-34. According to TRE 706 the process of appointing an expert by the court should be by: a. b. c. d. Issuance of a fiat Issuance of a show cause order Issuance of a mitimus Oral proclamation in open court

20-35. The trial judge being responsible for selecting its court-appointed experts: a. b. c. d. Should delay in advising counsel of the appointment prior to trial Should permit counsel to participate in the expert selection in most situations Must appoint an expert agreed to by the parties Should not rely upon its own knowledge of the personal characteristics and qualities of the expert

20-36. Prior to testifying at trial, the court-appointed expert: a. b. c. d. Must advise only the court of the witnesss findings Must withhold from the court the witnesss findings Must not give interviews about findings to the media Must advise the parties of the witnesss findings

20-37. If a court-appointed experts opinion is to be used in the hearing: a. b. c. d. The expert must give testimony under oath The expert must submit to a lie detector test if requested by either party The experts report may be admitted by affidavit The written report submitted to the parties prior to trial is admissible by either party

20-38. Unlike FRE 706, TRE 706: a. Prevents the jury from giving too much weight to the experts testimony by associating the expert with the judge b. Gives the court the discretion to inform the jury that the expert witness was appointed by the court c. Permits the court to advise the jury that the expert was appointed by the court on condition that it is done during a jury charge that the jury not give such testimony extra weight d. Gives the court the discretion to appoint additional expert witnesses and select the one to be used

Rule 801 Introduction to Hearsay

21-1. In the Anglo American legal system, hearsay evidence has traditionally been excluded because: a. b. c. d. Of the rule developed from old Roman law It would complicate and lengthen testimony It is unreliable Modern communication permits the deposition of essentially any witness

21-2. By definition, hearsay involves an out-of-court statement used in court to prove the truth of the in the out-of-court statement: a. b. c. d. Claim asserted Allegation asserted Accusation asserted Matter asserted

21-3. The primary concern is that the trier of fact will not be able to: a. b. c. d. View the demeanor of the declarant Hear cross examination of the declarant Subject the declarant to an oath Judge the declarants credibility

21-4. Hearsay evidence may suffer from four inadequacies which concern: a. b. c. d. Sincerity, ambiguity, memory and perception Sincerity, ambiguity, memory and character Ambiguity, memory, perception and character Character, memory, sincerity and perception

21-5. A hearsay exception often exists when one or more of the four hearsay risks: a. b. c. d. Is waived by counsel Is nonexistent or minimal Is resolved by affidavit Becomes stale

21-6. Hearsay may be admissible: a. b. c. d. Possibly even if only one risk is satisfied If two risks are satisfied If three of the more important risks are satisfied Only if all four risks are satisfied

21-7.

An important reason that hearsay is frequently admitted is that the evidence is needed: a. b. c. d. To provide the trier of fact with critical information To keep the trial moving at a reasonable pace To hold down costs To keep counsel from constantly objecting

21-8. Hearsay involves an out-of-court statement by: a. b. c. d. Anyone A declarant A witness A minor

21-9. A statement is defined as: a. b. c. d. Anything said outside of the courtroom An assertion which is an intentional communication A verbal communication made outside of the courtroom A written communication made outside of the courtroom

21-10. A statement is defined as an assertion which is: a. b. c. d. A casual observation A question An intentional communication A directive

21-11. The key concept is that to be hearsay the statement must have been made: a. b. c. d. For the purpose of influencing the outcome of the trial For the purpose of influencing the listener For the purpose of communicating information All of the above

21-12. A hearsay statement can be: a. b. c. d. Oral Written Nonverbal All of the above

21-13. A nonverbal statement may occur if a person: a. b. c. d. Makes a gesture Makes a sign Maintains silence All of the above

21-14 A declarant is a person who: a. b. c. d. Makes a statement Asks a question Performs nonverbal conduct intended as an assertion a&c

21-15. A witness: a. b. c. d. May be the same person as the declarant May be a different person than the declarant Is the person who is in court and relates the declarants statement to the trier of fact All of the above

21-16. If the hearsay is written and the writing is introduced into evidence: a. b. c. d. A jury instruction will correct the error The writing itself serves as the witness It must be notarized b&c

21-17. In a hearsay situation, the witness may be: a. b. c. d. A writing A video or audio tape A person testifying All of the above

21-18. An out-of-court statement means that the declarants statement was made: a. b. c. d. While the witness was testifying in the case At some time other than while the witness was testifying in the case While testifying in court or in a deposition or in another case b&c

21-19. Hearsay is present only if the statement is to be used to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement because only then: a. b. c. d. Is the information needed Is the declarants credibility at issue Is there a question about what had taken place Is the declarants character at issue

21-20. In order to determine when a declarants credibility is at issue, two factors must be known: a. b. c. d. What is the matter asserted and when was it asserted What is the matter asserted and what is the evidence used to prove What is the matter verbally asserted and what is the evidence used to prove What is the matter nonverbally asserted and what is the evidence used to prove

21-21. The matter asserted includes: a. b. c. d. Matters directly expressed Matters necessarily implied A question which includes a necessary implication All of the above

21-22. The burden of establishing that evidence is hearsay means that the objecting party: a. b. c. d. Must establish that the testimony is questionable Must show that the testimony might confuse or mislead the trier of fact Must demonstrate that the evidence involves an intentional communication Must evince that the information involved is not important to the case

21-23. If the declarants credibility is irrelevant because it does not matter whether declarant is telling the truth: a. b. c. d. The dangers of hearsay are not present The statement is not viewed as hearsay Declarants statement is objectionable a&b

21-24. A statement offered to prove its falsity: a. b. c. d. Is not hearsay Is a hearsay exception Has no probative value Is not material

21-25. Which of the following does not constitute hearsay? a. b. c. d. An unintentional communication Verbal acts Operative facts All of the above

21-26. An out-of-court declaration is not hearsay if: a. b. c. d. It was offered to prove the effect on the hearer or reader It was offered to prove the matter asserted It was a question even if it included a necessary implication None of the above

21-27. A declaration offered to prove the speakers or writers mental state: a. b. c. d. Is hearsay under TRE 801 if the declaration expressly states the declarants mental state Is allowed under the mental state hearsay exception Is nonhearsay if offered for the underlying implied assertion All of the above

21-28. Which of the following statements are nonhearsay? a. b. c. d. A prior inconsistent statement introduced to impeach the witness A prior consistent statement introduced to rehabilitate the witness Orders and instructions All of the above

21-29. The fact that the party was present when the declarant made the statement: a. b. c. d. Means the statement is not hearsay Means the witness may be asked what was done as a result of hearing the statement Is of no consequence unless a tacit admission None of the above

Rule 802 (Hearsay Rule), Rule 803 (Hearsay Exeptions), Rule 803(1.1) Prior Statement of Identification by witness, Rule 803 (1.2), Rule 803(2) Utterance

22-1. Hearsay is not admissible except as provided by: a. b. c. d. TRE and local rules Statutes TRE or otherwise by law All of the above

22-2. Hearsay can be used: a. b. c. d. To establish probable cause for an arrest warrant To furnish the basis for issuance of a search warrant In any will or child abuse action Both a and b

22-3. The prosecution can use hearsay documents of ownership and hearsay expert witness reports: a. b. c. d. At trial On appeal only To secure restraining orders At a preliminary examination

22-4. The judge at a detention hearing in a delinquent or unruly juvenile case or at a preliminary hearing in dependent and neglected or in abused child cases may consider: a. b. c. d. Any hearsay Reliable hearsay Hearsay by parents None of the above

22-5. Tennessee Advisory Commission hearings: a. b. c. d. Are required to observe TRE Are beyond the reach of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence May opt to use all or part of the rules of evidence Both b and c

22-6. The Criminal Sentencing Reform Act admits: a. b. c. d. Reliable hearsay Certified copies of documents and certified records of conviction Probative hearsay with opportunity to rebut if first degree murder All of the above

22-7. Pursuant to intercounty support actions, a petition for family support: a. Is admissible to prove the fact it alleges b. Creates a presumption of the fact alleged c. Creates an exception to the hearsay rule for allegations in the petition d. Both a and c 22-8. Some statutory exceptions to the hearsay rule raise constitutional issues in cases concerning: a. b. c. d. Criminal and child abuse cases Criminal and wills cases Criminal and conservatorship hearings None of the above are only applicable if the declarant is

22-9. Hearsay exceptions listed in Rule(s) unavailable. a. b. c. d. TRE 803 TRE 803 and 804 TRE 804 TRE 804(a) only

22-10. Of the 20 hearsay exceptions in Rule 803, 17 of these are available: a. b. c. d. Only if the declarant is available to testify Irrespective of the declarants availability to testify Even if the declarant is available and willing to testify b and c

22-11. The two hearsay exceptions in Rule 803 which may be used only if the declarant testifies at the hearing are:
a. Prior identification and certain child abuse and related cases b. Recorded recollection and certain child abuse and related cases

c. Prior identification and recorded recollection d. Prior identification and party admissions

22-12. The prior identification exception refers to: a. Criminal cases where the victim views a sketch, or photographic display and identifies the defendant as the one who committed the crime b. Criminal cases where the victim views a lineup or attends a hearing and identifies the defendant as the one who committed the crime c. Hit and run cases where the victim views a glimpse of the driver and identifies the defendant as the one who left the scene d. a and b 22-13. Prior identification testimony: a. Is not substantive evidence but may be used to bolster the credibility of the in-court identification b. Is substantive evidence which may be used to bolster the credibility of the incourt identification c. May be admissible only if the witnesss credibility has been attacked d. May not be used if the identification was not made under oath 22-14. Prior identification witnesses: a. b. c. d. Must testify at trial and must be available for cross-examination Must testify at trial and cross-examination must take place Must only be available to testify at trial and for cross-examination Must be available for cross-examination upon motion by defendant

22-15. While the advantage of prior identification testimony is that the ID was made earlier and may be more accurate than in-court testimony, its primary weakness is: a. b. c. d. There was no cross-examination at the prior identification The witness may have been suffering shock at the prior identification The witness may have been influenced by the investigating officers a and c

22-16. There is a need for the prior identification hearsay exception because: a. A witness may not be able to identify the accused in the courtroom b. The witness may pretend to not be able to identify the accused in the courtroom c. The witness may not be available at the time of the trial d. a and b 22-17. The hearsay exception for prior identification contains the following element(s): a. b. c. d. Identification of a person Identification of a person made only after perceiving the person Declarant must testify at the trial and be subject to cross-examination b and c

22-18. A prior consistent statement may be used: a. To enhance credibility of a weak witness b. To rehabilitate a witness who testified incorrectly c. To rehabilitate a witness attacked through impeachment for fabrication of trial testimony d. To impeach a hostile witness 22-19. A prior consistent statement: a. b. c. d. Is hearsay Is not substantive evidence Is a hearsay exception All of the above

22-20. The six varieties of a hearsay exception for admission of a party opponent are: a. The partys own statement, the partys adoption of a statement and a statement by a person authorized by the party to make a statement b. A statement by an agent or servant, a co-conspirator or a person in privity of estate with the party c. The partys own statement, a statement by an agent or servant and a statement made by a spouse d. a and b 22-21. The six varieties of admissions of a party opponent share the following common features: a. A statement by one party introduced by another party and used against the first party b. A statement by one party (or someone elses statement Rule 803(1.2) permits to be viewed at that partys statement) introduced by another party and used against the first party c. Applicable only in civil cases d. Applicable only in criminal cases 22-22. Rule 803(1.2)(A) provides that: a. b. c. d. Any assertion that a party spoke may be used against that party as an admission Any assertion that a party wrote may be used against that party as an admission Any assertion that a party did may be used against that party as an admission All of the above

22-23. Although the Tennessee hearsay exception concerning a partys own statement differs conceptually from the Federal rule, it: a. b. c. d. Is simple and absolute Has many particular applications Is complex and easily misunderstood A and B

22-24. For a statement made in a representative capacity: a. The representative must be acting in a representative capacity at the time the statement is made b. It is not necessary that the representative be acting in a representative capacity when the statement was made c. It is not necessary that the representative be acting in a representative capacity when the statement was made, as long as the statement was pertinent to that capacity d. It is not necessary that the representative be acting in a representative capacity if the statement was made within ten working days of the event which is the subject of the statement 22-25. An adoptive admission occurs: a. b. c. d. When the party has manifested an adoption or belief in its truth When a statement of truthfulness was made in jest When a statement of truthfulness was made in order to deceive a third person Even though the party expressly disavows or disagrees with the statement

22-26. An adoptive admission: a. b. c. d. May be implied by action taken May be an express statement of the party May be by silence or implication All of the above

22-27. A statement by a person authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject is best referred to as: a. b. c. d. An authorized admission An authorized statement A mistake An authorized declaration

22-28. To be an authorized admission, a partys statement: a. Requires proof of authority from a source other than the agents extrajudicial statement itself b. Does not require that the agents statement be communicated to an outsider c. a and b d. None of the above 22-29. A partys agents or employees statements: a. b. c. d. Are admissible against the party as an admission without exception Are admissible against the party as an admission subject to specific parameters Are not admissible against the party as an admission Are not admissible against the party as an admission unless in writing

22-30. In order for agents and employees admissions to be admissible against the principal: a. The subject matter must be within the scope of the agency or employment b. The statement must be made during the existence of the agency or employment relationship c. It must have been against the declarants interest to make the statement d. All of the above 22-31. The courts will admit against a party: a. A statement by a co-conspirator of a party made after the conclusion of the conspiracy b. A statement by a co-conspirator of a party during the course of and in furtherance of the conspiracy c. A statement of a party during the course of an conspiracy in an attempt to discontinue the conspiracy d. All of the above 22-32. According to federal case law, the question of admissibility of a conspirators statement: a. Is for the trial judge to decide if the elements are established by a preponderance of the evidence b. Is for the jury to decide based upon the preponderance of the evidence c. Is for the judge to decide based upon beyond a reasonable doubt d. Is for the jury to decide based upon a reasonable doubt

22-33. Admissions by persons in privity of estate with party means: a. b. c. d. Ancestors in estate to the current owner A contractual relationship The person is privy or has access to certain information The subject is not limited to real or personal property

22-34. Under Tennessee Rules, as opposed to Federal Rules, sworn judicial admissions: a. b. c. d. Are conclusive but may be rebutted Are conclusive and may not be rebutted Are evidentiary but can be rebutted Are evidentiary but cannot be rebutted

22-34.1 Under Tennessee Rules, as opposed to Federal Rules, non-sworn non-judicial admissions: a. b. c. d. Are conclusive but may be rebutted Are conclusive and may not be rebutted Are evidentiary but can be rebutted Are evidentiary but cannot be rebutted

22-35. To be admissible as an evidentiary admission: a. The statement must be made under oath at trial b. The statement may be made in sworn discovery answers c. The present exception covers interrogatory answers, deposition answers, earlier testimony by a party in todays trial d. Any of the above 22-36. Answers to civil procedure Rule 36 request for admission: a. b. c. d. Are conclusive admissions if the request is answered Are conclusive admissions even if there is no answer to the request Are evidentiary only if the request is not answered a and b

22-37. The admission of the genuineness of a document: a. Is conclusive on the issue of whether the document is what it is purported to be and admits the document into evidence b. Is conclusive on the issue of whether the document is what it is purported to be but does not admit the document into evidence c. Is usable only in the lawsuit where requested d. b and c 22-38. TRE 803(2) requires that for a statement to qualify as an excited utterance: a. The statement must have been made within 24 hours of an exciting event b. An utterance must have been made while the declarant was under stress caused by an excited event or condition c. The utterance must have been heard by a party not an agent or representative d. The statement must have been made in the presence of a third party 22-39. TRE 803(25) contains a limited exception for out-of-court declarations: a. b. c. d. Of decedents in will contests Of children in certain child sex abuse cases Of agents and representatives of persons making excited utterances Of victims in capital murder cases

22-40. The out-of-court statement describing or explaining an event or condition while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition or immediately thereafter is known as: a. The present sense impression exception which is recognized in Tennessee b. The present sense impression exception which is recognized under the Federal rules c. The present sense impression exception which is not recognized under the Tennessee rules d. b and c

Rule 803(3), Rule 803 (4), Rule 803 (5), Rule 803 (6), and Rule 803(7)

23-1. TRE 803(3), an exception admitting declarations of existing mental state to prove present mental condition: a. Requires that the declarant be unavailable to testify b. Permits included assertions about a fact other than the mental state c. Might include assertions of fact other than the mental state to the extent it sheds light on his state of mind d. Does not offer many opportunities for placing competent hearsay before the jury 23-2. TRE 803(3), the state of mind hearsay exception: a. Specifically allows declarations of existing mental state to prove future or past mental state b. Requires the application of the definition of relevance in Rule 403 to conclude that a declarants expression of his or her present mental state is admissible to prove that the declarant had the same mental state on a later date or at an earlier time c. Requires the application of the definition of relevance in Rule 401 to conclude that a declarants expression of his or her present mental state is admissible to prove that the declarant had the same mental state on a later date or at an earlier time d. Is substantially different that the Federal rule 23-3. TRE 803(3), the state of mind hearsay exception: a. Cannot be used to prove consistent contemporaneous conduct b. May be used together with relevance principles to prove consistent contemporaneous or future conduct c. May be used together with relevance principles to prove only consistent contemporaneous conduct d. May be used to prove that a third party acted in accordance with the declarant=s mental state 23-4. Declarations of present mental state: a. b. c. d. Generally are not admissible to prove anyones past conduct Are usually admissible as some proof of the declarants past conduct Are generally admissible to prove a third partys past conduct Permits proof of conduct of a third party with a foundation that the declarant and third party agreed in the past to do an act together

23-5. TRE 803(3)s state of mind hearsay exception: a. b. c. d. Makes uncommunicated threats competent Stops short of making uncommunicated threats competent Makes uncommunicated threats competent if combined with some act Admits such uncommunicated threats only to prove apprehension of the hearer

23-6. TRE 803(3), state of mind hearsay exception: a. Specifically states that a declarants state of mind may be used to prove present or future conduct b. Does not permit statements of mental condition amounting to memory or belief to prove the declarants consistent past conduct c. Contains a useful relaxation of the prohibition against proof of mental condition amounting to memory or belief in wills cases to prove past conduct d. b and c 23-7. An admissible declaration of an existing physical condition under TRE 803(3) may include a statement given: a. b. c. d. To declarants doctor in his office during a physical examination In a serious conversation with the declarants spouse In a casual gossip session among friends All of the above

23-8. A statement made by a declarant that, my leg hurts because a dog bit me,: a. b. c. d. Is admissible under TRE 803(3) Is partially admissible under TRE 803(3) Is fully admissible under TRE 803(4) b and c

23-9. TRE 803(4) provides a hearsay exception for statements made: a. b. c. d. For purposes of medical diagnosis For purposes of medical treatment For purposes of medical diagnosis and treatment None of the above

23-10. Under TRE 803(4), statements for purposes of medical diagnosis and treatment qualify for admission as: a. Medical history, including past or present symptoms, pain and sensations b. Medical history, including the general character of the cause or external cause of the symptoms c. Hearsay exceptions about the cause of the symptoms even if not pertinent to diagnosis and treatment d. a and b 23-11. Statements of causation made to a treating physician: a. b. c. d. Are always admissible under TRE 804(4) Are admissible under TRE 803(4) only if pertinent to diagnosis and treatment May include the identification of the perpetrator only in a child abuse case b&c

23-12. Hearsay statements excepted by Rule 803(4): a. Are limited to statements made by the person whose health is described in the statement b. Include statements about another persons health c. Do not include statements made to non-physicians even if made for the purpose of medical diagnosis and treatment d. Include statements by health professionals to the patient 23-13. Hearsay statements excepted by Rule 803(3): a. Are limited to declarations of present symptoms, pain or sensation b. Include declarations of present pain even if not made for medical diagnosis and treatment c. Include statements about the cause of a condition or about past medical history d. a and b 23-14. If a patients statements are not covered by TRE 803(3) or TRE 803(4): a. The expert witness may be permitted to repeat them under Rules 703 and 705 b. The expert witness may be permitted to repeat them to help the trier of fact evaluate the experts testimony c. The statements made by a declarant admissible under TRE 703 and 705 are not substantive evidence d. All of the above

23-15. Past recollection recorded involves: a. A hearsay statement, a hearsay exception and a writing previously made or adopted by the witness b. A non-hearsay, successfully restores the witnesss memory and the witness testifies from present memory c. A hearsay statement, a hearsay exception and allows the witness to read the writing into evidence but the writing itself is not admissible d. A record of regularly conducted activity 23-16. Present recollection refreshed: a. Involves hearsay, a hearsay exception and allows the writing used to refresh the witnesss memory to be admitted b. Involves hearsay, a hearsay exception but does not allow the writing used to refresh the witnesss memory to be admitted c. Does not involve hearsay and a writing may be used to restore the witnesss memory but may not itself be admitted d. Does not involve hearsay and the writing used to restore the witnesss memory may be admitted 23-17. The past recollection recorded hearsay exception may apply: a. b. c. d. To a memorandum or record To any document To an oral statement a and b

23-18. The past recollection recorded exception can be successfully used: a. Only if the witness experiences total lack of memory b. Even if the witness remembers some of the events but cannot testify fully and accurately c. Unless the document was recently made or adopted d. b and c 23-19. Past recollection recorded may be used: a. If the document was made or adopted while fresh in the witnesss memory b. If the document accurately reflects witnesss knowledge c. To admit the contents of a document as substantive evidence, but not the document itself d. All of the above

23-20. Accident reports: a. b. c. d. Are a good example of a document used for past recollection recorded Are specifically excluded as evidence by statute Are admissible if the officer on the stand can satisfy the foundation requirements May not be used to refresh present recollection

23-21. The term business records as dealt with in TRE 803(6) means: a. b. c. d. Records of for profit endeavors whether incorporated or unincorporated Non-profit activities if properly registered with the IRS Every kind of business institution, profit or non-profit Government and private activities if legal

23-22. The business duty requirement of 803(6): a. b. c. d. Is quite explicit Is vague and difficult to apply Is infrequently applied by the courts Produces a different result than the Federal Rule which does not contain a business duty requirement

23-23. With multiple declarants, which is often the case with business records: a. A business duty of any one declarant will result in admission of the record in its entirety b. A business duty of all of the declarants is necessary for admission of the record in its entirety c. A business duty of a majority of the declarants is necessary for admission of the record in its entirety d. The business duty requirement is waived, of course, if the source of information is unknown 23-24. In order to have sufficient indicia of trustworthiness to qualify as a business record under Rule 803(6): a. The record must have been made in the regular practice of that business activity b. The record must have been kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity c. The record may include an investigative accident report compiled by a business as a routine matter d. All of the above, but not an extraordinary report prepared for an irregular purpose such as litigation

23-25. TRE Rule 803(6) mandates that to be admissible as regularly conducted activity: a. A memorandum must have been made at or near the time of the event, act, condition, opinion or diagnosis contained in the record b. A memorandum must have been made within 72 hours of the event, act, condition, opinion or diagnosis contained in the record c. A memorandum must have been made within a reasonable time of the event, act, condition, opinion or diagnosis contained in the record d. a and c 23-26. The trustworthiness caveat of TRE 803(6): a. Prevents irresponsible use of the facts as truth in a business record b. Focuses on the declarant who furnished the information and the preparation stage c. Leaves the trial judge with considerable discretion on this issue and objecting counsel with a formidable burden of proof d. All of the above 23-27. TRE 803(6): a. b. c. d. Includes records, reports and written statements Does not include computer print-outs as a data compilation Applies to written or unrecorded oral statements a and c

23-28. TRE 803(6) exception permits a business record to: a. Include acts, conditions, opinions or diagnoses b. Include acts, conditions, opinions or diagnoses other than the content of medical and hospital records c. Include normal business transactions, such as sales or service calls d. a and c 23-29. When business records are used in court: a. b. c. d. TRE 803(6) may be used in combination with other hearsay exceptions TRE 803(6) is exclusive and may not be combined with other hearsay exceptions Other hearsay exceptions are limited to non-employee declarants None of the above

Rule 803 continued - - - Rule 803 (8) through Rule 803 (25)

24-1. The public records and reports exception to the hearsay rule requires records, reports, statements or data compilations in any form: a. b. c. d. To set forth the activities of the office or agency To set forth matters observed and reported pursuant to a legal duty Both a or b Either a and b

24-2. Under TRE 803(8): a. b. c. d. All public records are considered trustworthy Untrustworthy public records can be excluded Public records are not limited to only records open to the public b and c

24-3. In situations where the business records exception and the public records exception are available: a. The public records exception should be used because of its less detailed requirements b. The business records exception should be used because the public records exception applies to only records open to the public c. Both exceptions should be used because together a much greater foundation is allowed d. Both exceptions should be used in case one fails 24-4. Matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law: a. Include the information in a report if it has come from a declarant observing and reporting pursuant to duty imposed by law b. Include police reports in both civil and criminal cases c. Include certified copies of court convictions d. a and c 24-5. The public records exception includes: a. b. c. d. Public records containing information from sources outside the agency Factual findings from official investigations Even multiple hearsay None of the above

24-6. Under the records of vital statistics exception the record from the public office is admissible to prove: a. That a birth, marriage, divorce or death occurred b. All of the facts contained in the record c. Only some of the information in the records because of untrustworthiness or by statute d. a and c 24-7. The theoretical basis for the hearsay exception for marriage, baptismal and similar certificates are: a. The religious origins and the timely completion by public officials b. There may be no other source for the information c. A certificate memorializing the event may be kept as a part of the familys written history d. All of the above 24-8. For a certificate to be admissible under TRE 803(12): a. It must be made by a member of the clergy, a public official or other person authorized by the rules or practices of a religious organization or by law to perform the act certified b. It must purport to have been issued at the time of the act or within a reasonable time thereafter c. It must be used to prove a marriage or other ceremony or a sacrament d. All of the above 24-9. The family records exception: a. b. c. d. Strictly imposes a personal knowledge requirement Requires the application of TRE 602 May be applied without personal knowledge of the source of the information Provides a hearsay exception for a very limited variety of fact statements contained in family records

24-10. The most important aspect of the records of documents affecting an interest in property exception is: a. b. c. d. Its limited scope As a vehicle for proving that all statements in property documents are true As conclusive proof of the relationship of the parties signing the document All of the above

24-11. TRE 803(14) permits the admission of a recorded deed, financing statement or other property instrument only to prove: a. b. c. d. The contents of a certified copy are identical to the filed original The original was executed The original was delivered All of the above

24-12. The foundation for admission of statements in ancient documents must include: a. b. c. d. That it affects an interest in property That the document is thirty years old and has been in normal custody That there is a lack of suspicion of untrustworthiness All of the above

24-13. The ancient documents hearsay exception: a. b. c. d. Requires public recording Requires existence of thirty years or more and must affect a property interest Must have existed twenty years or more and have affected a property interest Applies only to real property

24-14. The commercial publications exception is based on the reliability of the information published because: a. b. c. d. The author has a professional and financial incentive to be accurate They have been time-tested for accuracy They have been relied on in the past All of the above

24-15. To rely upon the reputation of pedigree exception the reputation must exist: a. Within a persons family circle, the persons associates or within the persons community b. Within a persons family circle, the persons associates or within the persons church c. Within a persons business associates, the persons family circle or with the persons mother-in-law d. Within a persons community, within the persons church or within the persons union or guild

24-16. The ancient boundaries exception mandates that: a. b. c. d. The community members must have discussed the boundary The reputation must have existed at least thirty years before trial The reputation must have gelled before the dispute arose All of the above

24-17. The reputation of character exception means that evidence of reputation of character: a. b. c. d. Is admissible at any time to improve the credibility of a witness Provides both the relevancy and hearsay requirements for admission Satisfactorily overcomes the hearsay problem to reputation testimony Permits one persons opinion about another persons character

24-18. The judgment of previous conviction exception: a. Applies to final judgments for crimes punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year b. Applies to civil judgments in excess of $10,000.00 c. Excludes all misdemeanor convictions d. Excludes any conviction based on a nolo contendere plea 24-19. The judgment as to personal or family history or boundaries exception applies: a. To civil judgments b. To criminal judgments c. To criminal judgments or civil judgments and is not limited to the parties in those cases d. To both civil and criminal judgments but its applicability is limited to the parties in those cases 24-20. The CHILDRENS STATEMENTS exception allowing statements about abuse or neglect made by a victimized child: a. Is available only in juvenile court cases concerning the itemized issues b. Is limited to civil actions as opposed to criminal prosecution and requires the child be available as a witness if age 13 or over at the time of the hearing c. Requires corroboration of the hearsay statement by other evidence d. Cannot be limited by TRE 403

Rule 804, 804(a), 804 (b) 804 (b)(4), Rule 805, and Rule 806

25-1. The five hearsay exceptions in TRE 804(b) which require a showing that the declarant is unavailable to testify in court are: a. Former testimony, dying declarations, declarations against interest, reputation of pedigree, and forfeiture by wrongdoing b. Former testimony, dying declarations, declarations of pedigree, and forfeiture by wrongdoing c. Former testimony, dying declarations, declarations against interest, declarations of pedigree, and forfeiture by wrongdoing d. Dying declarations, declarations of pedigree, declarations against interest, and forfeiture by wrongdoing 25-2. The term unavailable refers to a witness who: a. b. c. d. Is not physically able to testify Is not physically able to be present in court Asserts a privilege All of the above

25-3. Examples of privileges which will render the witness unavailable include: a. b. c. d. Attorney/client, spousal, physician/patient Attorney/client, spousal, self-incrimination Self-incrimination, attorney/client, physician/patient All of the above

25-4. If the proponent of a hearsay statement imposes a privilege: a. b. c. d. The TRE 804(a) exception is available to the proponent The TRE 804(a) exception is not available to the proponent The TRE 804(a) exception may not be available to the proponent The TRE 804(a) exception is not available without corroboration

25-5. If a declarant is in the courtroom and is seated in the witness box, the witness: a. b. c. d. Is available unless a privilege is claimed Is unavailable unless willing to testify Is available if under a judicial order to testify Is available if under a threat of sanctions for contempt

25-6. A witness who is willing to testify about some subjects but not about the subject matter of the declarants statement is: a. Deemed unavailable with regard to the subject matter of the declarants statement b. Deemed unavailable about the subject matter of the declarants statement c. Deemed unavailable with regard to any subject matter d. Deemed available with regard to all subject matters 25-7. To be deemed unavailable because of lack of memory: a. The witness should be called to the stand and questioned about the subject matter covered by the witnesss own hearsay statement b. The court may require efforts to refresh witnesss recollection c. The witnesss hearsay statement must be corroborated d. a and b 25-8. The determination of how sick a person must be to be unavailable: a. b. c. d. Is made by the witnesss physician Is made by the witnesss spouse Is made by the court Requires a continuance or an alteration in the order of proof

25-9. In order for a witness to be unavailable because of the inability to serve process: a. b. c. d. The proponent of the evidence must have attempted service The opponent of the proof must have attempted service The return not to be found in this county must be notarized a and c

25-10. The inability to subpoena may result from: a. b. c. d. The declarant being out-of-state The declarant not being found The declarant being a lawyer All of the above

25-11. Deponents are unavailable: a. If the witness is at a greater distance than 100 miles from the place of trial or hearing b. If the witness is at a greater distance than 200 miles from the place of trial or hearing c. Unless it appears that the absence of the witness was procured by the party offering the deposition d. a and c

25-12. In criminal cases: a. A witnesss testimony by telephone meets the requirements of the confrontation clause b. A witnesss testimony by video tape meets the requirements of the confrontation clause c. A witness within or without the state may be taken into custody and required to appear d. None of the above 25-13. Former testimony may be admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule in the form of: a. b. c. d. A deposition Testimony recorded during a prior trial or hearing Testimony of a witness who heard prior testimony under oath All of the above

25-14. The three basic elements necessary to establish the former testimony exception to the hearsay rule are: a. Witness now unavailable, prior testimony was under oath and party against whom used had opportunity to interrogate the witness b. Witness now unavailable, prior testimony was under oath and party against whom used had both an opportunity and precisely the same motive to develop the testimony c. Witness now unavailable, testimony in prior hearing or deposition and party against whom the testimony is now offered had both an opportunity and a similar motive to develop testimony by direct, cross or re-direct examination d. Witness now unavailable, testimony under oath in a prior hearing or deposition and the presence of a different party with a motive to examine similar to the motive of the party against whom it is now used 25-15. If the civil procedure and evidence rules are in conflict: a. b. c. d. All four corners of both rules must be taken into consideration 804(b)(1) is superceded by 32.01(3) 804(b)(1) is the less severe rule b and c

25-16. The DYING DECLARATIONS exception to the hearsay rule is applicable in cases involving: a. b. c. d. Wrongful death claims Witnesses on their deathbeds Criminal homicide trials Will contests

25-17. The DYING DECLARATIONS exception to the hearsay rule requires: a. b. c. d. The deceased must have believed that death was imminent The death did occur The statement must have concerned the cause or circumstances of death All of the above

25-18. The prevalent underlying theory of the DYING DECLARATIONS exception to the hearsay rule is that: a. The witness is dead and the information can come from no other source b. A person knowingly facing imminent death will not assume the monumental risk of dying with a lie on ones lips c. This exception can be used only by the prosecution d. a and b 25-19. The DECLARATIONS AGAINST INTEREST exception to the hearsay rule: a. b. c. d. May be used any time it is relevant Applies whether the declarant is a party or a witness May be used by either the prosecution or the defense in a criminal case All of the above

25-20. Unlike an admission, a statement against interest: a. b. c. d. Is only admissible if the declarant is unavailable Requires the declarant to have first-hand knowledge of the facts declared Applies only in criminal cases a and b

25-21. The interests covered by TRE 804(b)(3) concerning declarations against interest do not include: a. Pecuniary interests b. Criminal liability c. Domestic interests d. a and b
25-22. The DECLARATIONS AGAINST INTEREST exception to the hearsay rule: a. b. c. d. Specifically requires that the declarant knew that the statement was harmful Inherently requires that the declarant knew the statement was harmful Does not require that the declarant knew that the statement was harmful Allows admission of non-self-inculpatory statements if they are made within a broader narrative that is generally self-inculpatory

25-23. The DECLARATIONS OF PEDIGREE exception to the hearsay rule: a. Requires that the declarant must have made the statement before the controversy arose b. Includes ancestry, birth, adoption, marriage, divorce, legitimacy, relationship by blood, adoption or marriage or another persons death c. Requires personal knowledge of the other persons pedigree d. All of the above

25-24. TRE 805 permits multiple hearsay to be introduced: a. b. c. d. Only in criminal cases involving the death penalty If there is a hearsay exception for each hearsay statement In civil cases only if corroborated None of the above

25-25. Multiple hearsay is permissible: a. b. c. d. If there is a hearsay exception for each hearsay statement Under the business records Rule 803(6) Under the public records Rule 803(8) All of the above

25-26. If a hearsay declarants statement is admitted as substantive evidence, the opposing party: a. Should have the same right to impeach the declarants credibility as exists with a live witness b. Cannot impeach the declarants credibility c. Can subpoena the declarant and ask leading questions about the extra-judicial statement as if under cross-examination d. a and c

Rules 901 903 26-1. Demonstrative, physical and sometimes oral evidence is only admissible if it is: a. b. c. d. 26-2. Authenticated or identified Notarized Certified The original rather than a copy

Authentication requires: a. That the judge make a preliminary determination whether there is evidence sufficient to support a finding of the fulfillment of whatever condition is necessary to make the item relevant b. The trier of fact makes the ultimate decision of whether the item is actually what it purports to be c. Little consideration of relevance d. a and b

26-3.

Any writing: a. b. c. d. Is evidence because the writing itself is the witness Must be supported by proper foundation unless excepted May never be admitted as evidence without proper foundation Requires no authentication

26-4.

The final arbiter of identification and authentication issues is: a. b. c. d. The jury The court The clerk and master The expert witness

26-5.

TRE 901(a) provides the general standard, evidence is authenticated or identified: a. If a majority of the parties agree in a multi-party case b. If there is evidence sufficient to the court to support a finding by the trier of fact that the matter in question is what its proponent claims c. If the information was written in a family Bible over twenty years ago d. If such a supply is in such general use as to permit most anyone to recognize the item

26-6.

There are basically three categories of evidence that are addressed by TRE 901: a. b. c. d. Written or documentary evidence, real evidence and illustrative evidence Real evidence, illustrative evidence and certified evidence Illustrative evidence, written or documentary evidence and public record evidence Written or documentary evidence, real evidence and business records evidence

26-7.

If an object is not unique, to be admissible it must be shown that: a. b. c. d. A chain of custody has been maintained There has been continuous possession of the item There has been no substantial change in its condition All of the above

26-8.

Handwriting or a signature on a document can be authenticated: a. By a witness who personally observed the signing or writing of the document even if the person had no familiarity with the writers handwriting b. By a witness who did not actually observe the signing and is not an expert in the field of handwriting but who has substantial familiarity with the typical handwriting of the purported writer c. Only if the familiarity of the handwriting was not obtained for the purpose of litigation d. By a only or by both b and c

26-9.

A writing or object may be identified or authenticated through a comparison of the item in question to a genuine authenticated example: a. If made by an expert b. If made by the trier of fact without the assistance of an expert c. If made by a non-expert witness who had substantial familiarity with the typical handwriting of the purported writer d. a or b

26-10. Unlike an expert, a non-expert opinion on handwriting: a. Cannot be made by making comparisons to genuine samples of the persons writing b. Cannot be made by studying and using the same procedures as experts c. Cannot be made by obtaining additional familiarity with the writing for the purpose of testifying in the litigation d. All of the above 26-11. In Amburn v. State, the court held that a handwriting expert could testify, as a result of comparing a disputed sample with known specimens, not only that a document was a forgery: a. b. c. d. Also as to the date of the forgery based upon an analysis of the ink Also as to the identity of the forger Also as to the excited state of the forger based upon the exaggerated style of the writing None of the above

26-12. In addition to handwriting, TRE 901(b)(3) permits comparisons of such items as fingerprints, ballistics, blood, fiber samples, typewriting, tread marks and shoe prints: a. By an expert b. By the court c. By the trier of fact d. All of the above

26-13. Evidence can be authenticated or identified by distinctive characteristics taken in conjunction with other circumstances such as: a. b. c. d. Appearance, contents and substance Appearance, substance and internal patterns Other distinctive characteristics and surrounding circumstances All of the above

26-14. The reply doctrine as a form of authentication means: a. There is a presumption that there has been a reply to both oral and written communication b. That a letter received within a reasonable period of time referring to an original letter is deemed, by circumstantial evidence, to be from the addressee of the first letter c. That a document or item of evidence which contains characteristics or information known only to a particular individual to be from that individual d. b and c 26-15. Rule 901(b)(5) regarding voice identification tracks the same requirements for handwriting identification except: a. The voice identification non-expert may base his or her opinion on a familiarity gained solely to enable the witness to make an in-court identification b. The non-expert witness for voice identification may use audio or video tapes to gain familiarity c. The non-expert for voice identification must successfully pass audio testing d. a and b 26-16. If the non-expert witness has, at the time of testifying, adequate familiarity with the speakers voice, he or she may testify after hearing the voice: a. b. c. d. Firsthand Through a telephone Through an answering machine or other recording or electronic transmission All of the above

26-17. Identification of the source of a telephone call can be made: a. If the voice of the caller can be identified b. Even if the exact identity of the caller is unknown c. If the identity of the caller was unknown but the caller was clearly associated with a person involved in the case d. Either a or c

26-18. A telephone conversation can be authenticated by proving: a. The number called was the number assigned to the individual by the telephone company b. The number reached was the number dialed c. A call was placed to an individual at his or her telephone number and that one claiming to be that individual answered the call d. Both a and b or c alone 26-19. A telephone call to a business can be authenticated by proving: a. The call was made to a number assigned by the telephone company to that particular place of business b. The conversation itself involved business matters reasonably transacted over a telephone c. Both a and b d. None of the above 26-20. Unless a writing is self-authenticating pursuant to Rule 9.02, testimony must be presented by an individual with personal knowledge by proving that: a. b. c. d. The writing was recorded or filed in a public office The recording or filing of the writing must be authorized by law The writing is in fact from the public office where items of this nature are kept All of the above

26-21. To qualify as an ancient document affecting an interest in property pursuant to TRE 803(16), requires that a document have been in existence for at least: a. b. c. d. Ten years Twenty years Twenty-five years Thirty years

26-22. In order for an ancient document to be admissible, it must be shown that: a. b. c. d. There are no suspicious circumstances surrounding the condition of the document There was no tampering or modification of the document The document was kept in appropriate and reliable custody All of the above

26-23. TRE 901(b)(8) providing for a method of authentication of ancient documents: a. Deals only with ancient documents affecting an interest in property b. Deals with documents and data compilations in any form c. Eliminates hearsay and any other considerations which might otherwise bar the evidence d. Applies only to certified or notarized documents

26-24. The authentication provisions of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence: a. Do not supersede authentication or identification methods prescribed by Tennessee or Federal statutes b. Do not supersede the Tennessee Supreme Court Rules c. Do not supersede the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules of Criminal Procedure which may provide additional methods of authenticating evidence d. All of the above 26-25. Tangible or real evidence may be introduced: a. b. c. d. By identification by a witness By the presentation of an unbroken chain of custody By either a or b By both a and b

26-26. To prove chain of custody: a. Testimony from the last person to have custody is required to verify the authenticity of the evidence and to show that it is what it purports to be b. Testimony from each person who has had custody or control of the evidence is needed to verify the authenticity of the evidence and to show that it is what it purports to be c. Testimony from an independent witness who has investigated each link is required to verify the authenticity of the evidence and show that it is what it purports to be d. Testimony from the official keeper of the records of the custody is required to verify 26-27. With regard to each link in the chain, testimony is required about: a. When, where and how possession or control of the evidence was obtained and its condition upon receipt b. Where the item was kept, how it was safeguarded and any changes in its condition during possession c. When, where and how it left the witnesss possession d. All of the above 26-28. Cases involving chain of custody issues: a. b. c. d. Are always criminal dealing with evidence used to convict the defendant Are usually criminal but may be civil Are usually civil but may be criminal Many times are will contests

26-29. The time period for chain of custody: a. Depends on whether the case is civil or criminal b. Must always be shown from the time initially related to the cause of action until the time of trial c. Must be shown from the time initially related to the cause of action until scientific analysis or other expert examination if only the experts opinion and testing results are admitted into evidence d. Always requires the item or sample itself to be within the chain of custody until the trial 26-30. The proof needed to establish the chain of custody: a. b. c. d. Varies according to the type of evidence Varies according to the other facts in the case Must meet a reasonableness standard All of the above

26-31. The standards used in determining that the chain of custody is sufficiently intact: a. Permit the court to give broad discretion in determining whether the chain of custody rule has been satisfied b. Require sufficient proof to satisfy the court that appropriate safeguards were taken, substantial demonstration of the chain is sufficient c. Require proof that the evidence was handled according to normal procedures and that there is no indicia of tampering with the evidence is generally adequate d. All of the above 26-32. TRE 902 SELF-AUTHENTICATION: a. Is virtually identical with the equivalent Federal rule b. Does not preclude the admission of proof that disputes be self-authenticating evidence nor is it the equivalent of a stipulation or judicial notice c. Lessens the authentication burden for eleven classes of evidence requiring no other proof than reference to the evidence itself d. All of the above 26-33. If evidence does not satisfy TRE 902 and is therefore not self-authenticating: a. The typical foundation requirements cannot be omitted b. The evidence cannot be admitted even if it complies with the general principal of establishing that the evidence is what it is purported to be c. A corroborating witness is required d. The typical foundation requirements can be omitted

26-34. A TRE 902 document to be admissible must bear an attesting or executing signature and the seal of: a. b. c. d. The State of Tennessee or the United States Any other state, territory or political subdivision Any public office or agency Any of the above

26-35. Even though the official who signed a domestic public document did not attach a seal to it, the fact that another officer did so and verified the signing officers capacity and signature: a. b. c. d. Is sufficient indicia of reliability to justify admission of the document May be sufficient indicia of reliability to justify admission of the document Is not sufficient indicia of reliability to justify admission of the document Is of no significance whatever

26-36. For a foreign public document to be admissible: a. It must have been purportedly executed or attested by a person authorized to do so by the laws of the foreign country b. There must always be a final certification by various American and foreign diplomatic officials c. In addition to a it may be ordered by the court, for good cause shown, that the document be treated as presumptively authentic without final certification if all parties have had a reasonable opportunity to investigate the accuracy and authenticity of the foreign official document at issue d. In addition to a it may be ordered by the court, for good cause shown, that the document be treated as presumptively authentic without final certification if the defendant has had a reasonable opportunity to investigate the accuracy and authenticity of the foreign official document at issue 26-37. Under TRE 902(4), a copy of an official record or report, whether or not filed in a public office, is self-authenticating: a. b. c. d. If properly certified If under seal If the chain of custody requirement is met a and b

26-38. Any document that is authorized to be and is actually filed in a public office is deemed selfauthenticating: a. If properly certified as correct by the custodian or other person authorized to issue a certification b. If under seal c. If the chain of custody requirement is met d. a and b

26-39. Self-authenticating documents under Rule 902 do not include: a. b. c. d. Official publications such as books and pamphlets issued by a public authority Newspapers and periodicals Chain letters Trade inscriptions

26-40. TRE 902 concerning self-authentication: a. Precludes other hurdles to admissibility such as hearsay and unfair prejudice b. Merely does away with the burden of bringing in the foundation of testimony necessary to authenticate the evidence c. Is applicable only in civil cases d. Is applicable only in criminal cases 26-41. Other documents which are self-authenticating under Rule 902 include: a. b. c. d. Acknowledged documents Insurance policies Insurance policies only when required by contract a and c

26-42. Any signature, document or other item is presumed to be self-authenticating: a. b. c. d. If the procedure outlined in the applicable Tennessee statute is satisfied If the procedure outlined in the applicable Federal statute is satisfied either a or b both a and b

26-43. A subscribing or attesting witness testimony: a. b. c. d. Generally is not required May be required by statute May be required to rebut claim of forgery All of the above

Rules 1004 1008 27-1. At common law, the best evidence rule actually applied only in certain situations where: a. b. c. d. 27-2. The terms of a writing were a collateral issue The terms of a writing were a controlling issue The terms of a writing were either a controlling or collateral issue The terms of the writing involved hearsay

The best evidence rule has evolved at common law to what is now more accurately called: a. b. c. d. The best writing rule The original writing rule The collateral writing rule The controlling issue writing rule

27-3.

The best evidence or original writing rule can be summarized as follows:

a. In proving the terms of a writing, where the terms are material, the original
writing must be produced unless it is shown to be unavailable for some reason other than the serious fault of the proponent b. In proving the terms of a writing, the original writing must be produced unless it is shown to be unavailable for some reason other than the serious fault of the proponent c. In proving the terms of a writing, where the terms are material, the original writing must be produced unless it is shown to be unavailable for some valid reason d. In proving the terms of a writing, where the terms are material, the original writing must be produced unless it is shown to be unavailable for some reason other than the serious fault of either party 27-4. The original writing rule: a. Recognizes that the exact content of writings and the like is often of critical importance to the modern world b. Operates to minimize inaccuracies caused by an intentional or accidental misrepresentation of the contents of various items c. Avoids risks that occur when a hand-copied document or oral statement of the content of that document is admitted into evidence to prove the contents of that document d. All of the above 27-5. The original writing or original document rule is ordinarily required to prove the content of: a. b. c. d. A writing A recording A photograph All of the above

27-6.

Many physical objects are not covered by the best evidence rule: a. b. c. d. Unless the object was the subject of a writing Unless a previous writing describes the object Unless a writing on the object is to be proven None of the above

27-7.

Writings and recordings now cover: a. b. c. d. Letters, words, numbers, sounds, or their equivalent Objects of art Almost every conceivable method of recording information a and c

27-8.

TRE 1001(2) includes as photographs not only still photos, but also: a. b. c. d. X-rays, video tapes and motion pictures X-rated video tapes and motion pictures X-rays, video tapes and motion pictures if introduced by an expert Video tapes and motion pictures

27-9.

The term original: a. b. c. d. Refers to the item whose contents are at issue and is to be proved Refers to the first in a series of documents With regard to a writing, is defined by Rule 1001(3) in several ways a and c

27-10. An original can also be: a. A duplicate original b. A counterpart original c. A carbon original d. All of the above 27-11. An original: a. Of a computer printout must have been made reasonably near the time of the composition b. Of a computer printout may be made at any time c. Of a computer printout must be on paper d. Screen image does not qualify as an original for evidence purposes 27-12. The definition of duplicate: a. Does not include a manual copy, which was subsequently produced whether handwritten or typed b. Does not include a photocopy c. Does not include copies produced from the same impression d. Does not include mechanically or electronically re-recorded copies

27-13. For the best evidence rule to be applicable: a. b. c. d. The content of an item of evidence must be at issue Whether the item exists must be at issue Whether the item was executed must be at issue All of the above

27-14. A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original: a. b. c. d. Unless the original is available Unless a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original Unless an objection is raised by other counsel All of the above

27-15. As a foundation for admissibility of a duplicate under TRE 1003: a. The proponent must establish that the item satisfies the definition of a duplicate in Rule 1001(4) b. The proponent must establish that the copy accurately reproduces the original item c. The proponent must lay a foundation proving the authenticity of the original d. All of the above 27-16. According to TRE 1004, evidence other than an original or a duplicate is admissible: a. If the original is lost or destroyed, the original is not obtainable through judicial process, the original is in control of opponent and notice is given b. If the original is lost or destroyed, the original is not obtainable except by treaty to obtain a copy of a foreign document, the original is in control of opponent and notice is given c. If the original is lost or destroyed, the original is not obtainable through judicial process in the county where suit was brought and the original is in control of the opponent d. If the original is lost or destroyed, the original is not obtainable through judicial process, the original is in control of opponent, whether or not notice was given to the opponent 27-17. The best evidence rule is inapplicable if the writing, recording or photograph: a. b. c. d. Is closely related to a controlling issue Is not closely related to a controlling issue Cannot be accurately duplicated Is to be used in a capital case

27-18. If counsel elects not to produce the original of a public record, TRE 1005 permits: a. Authentication by a certified copy under Rule 902(4) b. Authentication by a witness who personally compared the copy with the original and can testify that the two are identical c. Secondary evidence if no other copy of a public record were available d. All of the above

27-19. In order to make it easier for the trier of fact to understand voluminous or complex proof, counsel may present a judge or jury with a summary of evidence presented in the case in the form of: a. b. c. d. A written or oral conclusion A chart, table, map or calculation Video tape or photography All of the above

27-20. The summary itself may be used: a. As substantive evidence b. As a pedagogical tool that assists the jury in understanding and organizing other evidence c. If the jury is instructed on the proper, limited use of summaries presented as a pedagogical tool d. All of the above 27-21. In order to be admissible, a summary used as substantive evidence will require a foundation witness to establish that: a. The original evidence is voluminous and the summary is sufficiently accurate in representing the original evidence b. The underlying records have been made available to the adverse party c. The underlying original documents would themselves be admissible, if not actually admitted d. All of the above 27-22. TRE 1006: a. Permits summaries only of writings as substantive evidence b. Permits summaries of writings, recordings and photographs as substantive evidence c. Mandates pre-trial notice of the use of summaries d. a and c

27-23. No original need be produced or its absence explained to prove the content of a writing, recording or photograph: a. b. c. d. Through the testimony or deposition of a party against whom it is offered Through the written unsworn and unsigned admission of the adverse party Through the written signed admission of the adverse party only a and b

27-24. An oral admission may dispense with the original writing rule: a. b. c. d. Under Rule 1004 when secondary proof is presented in some cases Under Rule 1007 at any time Under Rule 1006 as a part of an oral summary None of the above

27-25. TRE 1008: a. Is a special application of the concepts set out in TRE 104 b. Provides that the judge alone resolves questions about technical satisfaction of the best evidence rule c. Provides that the trier of fact decides issues that directly affect the factual basis of the controversy d. All of the above