This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Evidence B Examination (Tillers), Cardozo School of Law, Fall Term 2008 Evidence B Fall Term 2008 Prof. Peter Tillers Instructions This examination lasts 1 hour and 40 minutes (100 minutes). There are 25 questions. This is a closed-book examination. However, you are provided with a copy of the Federal Rules of Evidence. See the appendix following the examination questions. Assume that the Federal Rules of Evidence apply to all problems in the questions in this examination, This is a modified multiple-choice examination. Check your answer to each question in one of the two spaces provided after each questionfor example, (i) check either the space that follows objection sustained or the space that follows objection overruled, (ii) check either the space that follows motion granted or the space that follows motion denied, and (iii) so on. Do not check both spaces after a question. If you do so, you will get no credit for your response to the question. However, check at least one answer to each question. If you do not do so, you will get no credit for your response to the question. If you think the answer to a question is uncertain, check the answer that you think is more probably the correct answer. Give a brief explanation for each checked answer. Checked answers without explanations will get no credit. Your explanations need not be elegant. But they must be intelligible. Some questions have more than one plausible checked answer. If you provide a plausible answer for your checked answer, you will get full credit for your checked answer. If you give an implausible explanation for a checked answer, you will get no credit for your response to the question. In short, check an answer for each question and give a plausible explanation for each of your checked answers . If you check an answer and give a plausible explanation for your checked answer and only if you do so you will get full credit for your response to a question. p. 1 of 67 Evidence B Examination (Tillers), Cardozo School of Law, Fall Term 2008 Question 1 Murder Trial. David Defendant is charged with killing Valiant Victim on June 1, 2000. Defendant invokes his privilege against self-incrimination and does not testify. Wally Witness testifies that David Defendant's reputation among her associates is that of a non-violent and peaceable person. The government later offers Observant Observer's testimony that he saw David Defendant assault and beat Sam Jones, Martha Smith, and Neat Noble. Defense counsel's objection should be sustained _______ OR overruled ______ Please explain: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________...
View Full Document
- Fall '05