Object Anyway
Current time: 11-21-2017, 12:54 AM
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Author: NonEntity
Last Post: Freerangecanuck
Replies: 3
Views: 1286

Post Reply 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Object Anyway
12-02-2016, 06:50 AM
Post: #1
Object Anyway
One of the things that Marc constantly hammers on is the importance of saying "Object."

Here is a podcast about a Supreme Court case that set precedence that all hinged on the defendant forcing his attorney to object, against the attorney's wishes. It may be helpful to listen to to ingrain the importance of this into your mind.

- NonE the severely deluded Sister Sleazious .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 09:21 AM (This post was last modified: 07-04-2017 09:23 AM by eye2i2hear.)
Post: #2
RE: Object Anyway
Investigating Something i happened across that my aide further in one's urban camouflage weaving?

Noting a.) the author's referring to the Offer as the coin of Objection's other side, and b.) some Attorney's stating that practically anything that can be done At Trial can be done Pre Trial:

Subject subtitle: Offer Anyway. ?

Christin J. Jones, circa he ABA website, Wrote:A Guide to the Offer of Proof – August 31, 2016

No matter how prepared you are for trial, it’s bound to happen. Your judge sustains an objection and strikes a piece of evidence or testimony that is significant and material to advancing your case. And while your immediate goal is to continue developing your case and obtain a victory at trial, a seasoned [attorney] is also thinking ahead and working to develop the record and preserve issues for appeal. But for a less-than-seasoned attorney, this is not so easy to do. This article addresses one largely neglected technique to preserving error when evidence is struck from consideration: the offer of proof.

The offer of proof is the other side of the objection coin. Just as an objection preserves errors in admitting evidence for review, an offer of proof preserves errors in excluding evidence.
Federal Rule of Evidence 103 specifically provides that a party may claim error “if the ruling excludes evidence, [and] a party informs the court of its substance by an offer of proof, unless the substance was apparent from the context.” Fed. R. Evid. 103(a)(2).

Why Bother?
This preservation device can be critical to a case when key evidence has been excluded by the trial court. Proponents of excluded evidence put themselves in a weak position to later argue the value of excluded evidence if they failed to make an offer of proof at trial and have been unsuccessful in seeking reversals of dismissals of their cases when they based their appeals on excluded evidence for which no offer of proof was made. See, e.g., Nulf v. Int’l Paper Co., 656 F.2d 553, 562 (10th Cir. 1981); Sime v. Trustees of Cal. State Univ. & Colleges, 526 F.2d 1112, 1113–14 (9th Cir. 1975). So the most obvious purpose of an offer of proof is that it creates an adequate record from which an appellate court can determine whether the exclusion of evidence affected the substantial rights of the offering party and whether the error requires reversal. Inselman v. S&J Operating Co., 44 F.3d 894, 896 (10th Cir. 1995), on reh’g in part, (Feb. 17, 1995). Rule 103 contemplates that hearings on offers and objections will build a basis on which a reviewing court may consider the ruling ultimately made. Christensen v. Felton, 322 F.2d 323, 328 (9th Cir. 1963) (hearing on proffer gives reviewing court “a better basis on which to decide” whether court was right to exclude evidence).

Simply put, the offer of proof allows the appellate court to review and consider the evidence if it determines that the evidence should have been admitted by the trial court. Instead of the appellate court only seeing that there would have been evidence or testimony regarding a certain point or issue, an offer of proof enables the appellate court to review what the evidence specifically was.

But the offer of proof also serves a second purpose likely of more interest to trial counsel: It gives you an opportunity to persuade the trial court to change its mind and admit the evidence. An offer of proof provides the trial court more information regarding the evidence on which to make a more complete and adequate basis for a ruling and allows the trial court to review the evidence and potentially reevaluate and change its ruling on the objection. A well-crafted offer of proof can also be an opportunity to argue the facts in an effort to persuade the judge to accept your theory of the case.

... The offer of proof is a difficult skill to perform competently, much less master. But if done properly, an offer of proof not only preserves the issue for appeal but also gives trial counsel another valuable chance at persuading the trial court to admit the proffered evidence.
Christin J. Jones is an associate in the Dallas, Texas, office of Kilpatrick Townsend.

Copyright © 2017, American Bar Association. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or downloaded or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association. The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of the American Bar Association, the Section of Litigation, this committee, or the employer(s) of the author(s).
--the rest of the story

Community customs & traditions may vary... [Image: puppy-kisses-smiley.gif?1292867658]

Is it voluntary? (because if it isn't, what inherently is it?)
And can it be voluntary, if there's indoctrination, intimidation, coercion, threats & initiation of violence?
[not to be confused with asking: can it be said to be "voluntary" even when such is present.?]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 10:48 AM (This post was last modified: 07-04-2017 10:56 AM by NonEntity.)
Post: #3
RE: Object Anyway
Interesting material and post. I know I could look this up myself but if you'd be inclined I think it might be helpful to the audience to give a description and perhaps example of just what the hell an "offer of proof" is and how one would go about affecting such in their own situation.

Especially as it appears to me that judges regularly dismiss stuff with no excuse or explanation. For those willing to go the appeal route I think this might be of great value.

Addendum: I see that in following your link the article goes into greater depth on what I just brought up, so I apologize for my speaking too quickly. This seems really worth pursuing. I wonder in Marc has ever stumbled across this and what he might think of it.

- NonE the severely deluded Sister Sleazious .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 07:11 PM
Post: #4
RE: Object Anyway
Note: the above link is about presenting evidence, i.e. getting your evidence into court if judged to be inadmissible. It would not be useful in my opinion.

It does seem useful for a case that has 'shield' type rules. That is not the approach Marc takes.

Purveyor of the 60 MPH post.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)