Misplaced Pages

#167832

66-651: The Massachusetts Appeals Court is the intermediate appellate court of Massachusetts . It was created in 1972 as a court of general appellate jurisdiction . The court is located at the John Adams Courthouse at Pemberton Square in Boston , the same building which houses the Supreme Judicial Court and the Social Law Library . The Appeals Court hears most appeals from the seven court departments of

132-732: A court of errors (or court of errors and appeals ), on the premise that it was intended to correct errors made by lower courts. Examples of such courts include the New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals (which existed from 1844 to 1947), the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors (which has been renamed the Connecticut Supreme Court ), the Kentucky Court of Errors (renamed the Kentucky Supreme Court ), and

198-400: A court of appeal(s) , appeal court , court of second instance or second instance court , is any court of law that is empowered to hear a case upon appeal from a trial court or other lower tribunal . In much of the world, court systems are divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and considers factual evidence and testimony relevant to

264-400: A witness , who has sworn or solemnly affirmed to tell the truth. The bulk of the law of evidence regulates the types of evidence that may be sought from witnesses and the manner in which the interrogation of witnesses is conducted such as during direct examination and cross-examination of witnesses. Otherwise types of evidentiary rules specify the standards of persuasion (e.g., proof beyond

330-434: A certain point, the burden shifts to the other party to produce superior evidence tending to disprove it. One special category of information in this area includes things of which the court may take judicial notice . This category covers matters that are so well known that the court may deem them proved without the introduction of any evidence. For example, if a defendant is alleged to have illegally transported goods across

396-474: A given situation, ranging from reasonable suspicion to preponderance of the evidence , clear and convincing evidence , or beyond a reasonable doubt . There are several types of evidence, depending on the form or source. Evidence governs the use of testimony (e.g., oral or written statements, such as an affidavit ), exhibits (e.g., physical objects), documentary material , or demonstrative evidence , which are admissible (i.e., allowed to be considered by

462-775: A justice of either the Appeals Court or of the Supreme Judicial Court) attains age 70 and retires, that justice may be recalled to active service on the Appeals Court as needed. Currently, no recall justices are serving. The court's current members, listed by seniority, are as follows: Former justices: The following justices have been elevated from the Appeals Court to the Supreme Judicial Court 42°21′34″N 71°03′40″W  /  42.359343°N 71.061160°W  / 42.359343; -71.061160 Appellate court An appellate court , commonly called

528-479: A month at a time. Appeals are heard from September through July at the John Adams Courthouse as well as at special sessions held at various locations such as law schools throughout Massachusetts. Twenty-five justices sit on the Appeals Court: one chief justice and twenty-four associate justices. The most recent chief justice of the Appeals Court was Mark V. Green. If a Massachusetts appellate justice (that is,

594-516: A reasonable doubt) that a trier of fact—whether judge or jury—must apply when it assesses evidence. Today all persons are presumed to be qualified to serve as witnesses in trials and other legal proceedings, and all persons are also presumed to have a legal obligation to serve as witnesses if their testimony is sought. However, legal rules sometimes exempt people from the obligation to give evidence and legal rules disqualify people from serving as witnesses under some circumstances. Privilege rules give

660-479: A separate docket. The single justice may review interlocutory orders and orders for injunctive relief issued by certain Trial Court departments, as well as requests for review of summary process appeal bonds, certain attorney's fee awards, motions for stays (postponement) of civil proceedings or criminal sentences pending appeal, and motions to review impoundment orders. Each associate justice sits as single justice for

726-463: A small proportion of trial court decisions result in appeals. Some courts, particularly supreme courts, have the power of discretionary review , meaning that they can decide whether they will hear an appeal brought in a particular case. Many U.S. jurisdictions title their appellate court a court of appeal or court of appeals . Both terms are used in the United States, but the plural form

SECTION 10

#1732851465168

792-468: A state line by driving them from Boston to Los Angeles , the court may take judicial notice of the fact that it is impossible to drive from Boston to Los Angeles without crossing a number of state lines. In a civil case, where the court takes judicial notice of the fact, that fact is deemed conclusively proved. In a criminal case, however, the defense may always submit evidence to rebut a point for which judicial notice has been taken. Some rules that affect

858-592: A valid product liability claim against the manufacturer of the tires on his van (which had rolled over resulting in severe brain damage). The United States has a very complicated system of evidentiary rules; for example, John Wigmore 's celebrated treatise on it filled ten volumes. James Bradley Thayer reported in 1898 that even English lawyers were surprised by the complexity of American evidence law, such as its reliance on exceptions to preserve evidentiary objections for appeal. Some legal experts, notably Stanford legal historian Lawrence Friedman , have argued that

924-631: Is New Zealand's principal intermediate appellate court. In practice, most appeals are resolved at this intermediate appellate level, rather than in the Supreme Court . The Court of Appeals of the Philippines is the principal intermediate appellate court of that country. The Court of Appeals is primarily found in Manila , with three divisions each in Cebu City and Cagayan de Oro . Other appellate courts include

990-731: Is generally only granted in cases of public importance, matters involving the interpretation of the Commonwealth Constitution, or where the law has been inconsistently applied across the States and Territories.[19] Therefore, in the vast majority of cases, the appellate divisions of the Supreme Courts of each State and Territory and the Federal Court are the final courts of appeal. The Court of Appeal of New Zealand, located in Wellington ,

1056-513: Is lacking in a bench trial, the trial judge will simply dismiss the evidence as unpersuasive or irrelevant. Other kinds of evidence can be self-authenticating and require nothing to prove that the item is tangible evidence. Examples of self-authenticating evidence includes signed and certified public documents, newspapers, and acknowledged documents. In systems of proof based on the English common law tradition, almost all evidence must be sponsored by

1122-407: Is less agreement about whether or not judgements of relevance or irrelevance are defensible only if the reasoning that supports such judgements is made fully explicit. However, most trial judges would reject any such requirement and would say that some judgements can and must rest partly on unarticulated and unarticulable hunches and intuitions. However, there is general (though implicit) agreement that

1188-513: Is more common in American English , while in contrast, British English uses only the singular form. The correct form is whichever is the statutorily prescribed or customary form for a particular court and particular jurisdiction; in other words, one should never write "court of appeal" when the court at issue clearly prefers to be called a "court of appeals", and vice versa. Historically, certain jurisdictions have titled their appellate court

1254-469: Is normally not permitted at trial. Certain kinds of evidence, such as documentary evidence, are subject to the requirement that the offeror provide the trial judge with a certain amount of evidence (which need not be much and it need not be very strong) suggesting that the offered item of tangible evidence (e.g., a document, a gun) is what the offeror claims it is. This authentication requirement has import primarily in jury trials. If evidence of authenticity

1320-405: Is one of the largest and most complex areas of the law of evidence in common-law jurisdictions. The default rule is that hearsay evidence is inadmissible. Hearsay is an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. A party is offering a statement to prove the truth of the matter asserted if the party is trying to prove that the assertion made by the declarant (the maker of

1386-490: Is raining. If the person is carrying a wet umbrella, and he is wearing a wet rain coat, those observations are circumstantial evidence that it is raining outside. Different types of proceedings require parties to meet different burdens of proof , the typical examples being beyond a reasonable doubt, clear and convincing evidence, and preponderance of the evidence. Many jurisdictions have burden-shifting provisions, which require that if one party produces evidence tending to prove

SECTION 20

#1732851465168

1452-447: 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." For example, evidence that the victim of a car accident was apparently a "liar, cheater, womanizer, and a man of low morals" was unduly prejudicial and irrelevant to whether he had

1518-428: Is unfairly prejudicial, confusing, or the relevance or irrelevance of evidence cannot be determined by logical analysis. There is also general agreement that assessment of relevance or irrelevance involves or requires judgements about probabilities or uncertainties. Beyond that, there is little agreement. Many legal scholars and judges agree that ordinary reasoning, or common sense reasoning, plays an important role. There

1584-617: The Sandiganbayan for cases involving graft and corruption, and the Court of Tax Appeals for cases involving tax. Appeals from all three appellate courts are to the Supreme Court . The Court of Appeal of Sri Lanka, located in Colombo , is the second senior court in the Sri Lankan legal system . In the United States, both state and federal appellate courts are usually restricted to examining whether

1650-491: The civil law system , evidence is normally studied as a branch of procedural law . All American law schools offer a course in evidence, and most require the subject either as a first year class, or as an upper-level class, or as a prerequisite to later courses. Furthermore, evidence is heavily tested on the Multistate Bar Examination (MBE) - approximately one-sixth of the questions asked in that test will be in

1716-419: The trier of fact , such as jury ) in a judicial or administrative proceeding (e.g., a court of law). When a dispute, whether relating to a civil or criminal matter, reaches the court there will always be a number of issues which one party will have to prove in order to persuade the court to find in their favour. The law must ensure certain guidelines are set out in order to ensure that evidence presented to

1782-399: The "clear error" standard. Before hearing any case, the court must have jurisdiction to consider the appeal. The authority of appellate courts to review the decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some areas, the appellate court has limited powers of review. Generally, an appellate court's judgment provides the final directive of the appeals courts as to

1848-402: The Appeals Court. After a decision by the Appeals Court, a party may seek "further appellate review" by requesting review by the Supreme Judicial Court. The Appeals Court usually hears cases in three-judge panels, which rotate so that every judge has an opportunity to sit with every other judge. In addition to its panel sittings, the Appeals Court runs a continuous "single justice" session, with

1914-610: The Appeals Court. For example, an appeal from a conviction of first degree murder goes directly to the Supreme Judicial Court . The Supreme Judicial Court can also elect to bypass review by the Appeals Court and hear a case on "direct appellate review." In the District Court Department , appeals in certain civil cases are made first to the Appellate Division of the District Court before being eligible for appeal to

1980-513: The Biblical two-witness rule, it concluded that a single witness, or private documents, could constitute half-proof , which though insufficient for conviction might justify torture to extract further evidence. Because evidence in the continental (civil law) system was evaluated by judges rather than juries, that system did not develop exclusionary rules of evidence in the way English law did. A distinct feature of English common law historically

2046-554: The Crown enacted the Statute of Frauds and Perjuries , prohibiting plaintiffs from alleging certain contractual breaches to the jury unless accompanied by a signed, written instrument. Another early evidence rule was the prohibition on hearsay , the admission of an out-of-court statement to prove the truth of what is asserted. In the early 19th Century, Chief Justice Lord Mansfield of the Court of Common Pleas stated: "In Scotland and most of

Massachusetts Appeals Court - Misplaced Pages Continue

2112-419: The English common law tradition, evidence must conform to a number of rules and restrictions to be admissible. Evidence must be relevant  – that is, it must be directed at proving or disproving a legal element. However, the relevance of evidence is ordinarily a necessary condition but not a sufficient condition for the admissibility of evidence. For example, relevant evidence may be excluded if it

2178-565: The Federal Circuit , which has general jurisdiction but derives most of its caseload from patent cases, on one hand, and appeals from the Court of Federal Claims on the other. In the United States, Alabama, Tennessee, and Oklahoma also have separate courts of criminal appeals. Texas and Oklahoma have the final determination of criminal cases vested in their respective courts of criminal appeals, while Alabama and Tennessee allow decisions of its court of criminal appeals to be finally appealed to

2244-814: The Massachusetts Trial Court, including the Superior , District , Probate and Family , Juvenile , Land , Housing , and Boston Municipal Court departments. The Appeals Court also hears appeals from final decisions of certain Massachusetts administrative agencies, including the Department of Industrial Accidents, the Appellate Tax Board , and the Commonwealth Employment Relations Board . Some types of appeals are not heard before

2310-633: The Mississippi High Court of Errors and Appeals (since renamed the Supreme Court of Mississippi ). In some jurisdictions, a court able to hear appeals is known as an appellate division . The phrase "court of appeals" most often refers to intermediate appellate courts. However, the New York Court of Appeals is the highest appellate court in New York. The New York Supreme Court is a trial court of general jurisdiction. The Supreme Court of Maryland

2376-473: The accuser to induce friends or family to give false evidence in support of their accusations because, normally, it would be rejected by the presiding authority or judge. There are several examples where presiding authorities are not bound by the rules of evidence. These include the military tribunals in the United States and tribunals used in Australia to try health professionals. In every jurisdiction based on

2442-415: The admissibility of evidence are nonetheless considered to belong to other areas of law. These include the exclusionary rule of criminal procedure , which prohibits the admission in a criminal trial of evidence gained by unconstitutional means, and the parol evidence rule of contract law , which prohibits the admission of extrinsic evidence of the contents of a written contract. In countries that follow

2508-492: The area of evidence. The MBE predominantly tests evidence under the Federal Rules of Evidence , giving little attention to matters on which the law of different states is likely to be inconsistent. Acts that conceal, corrupt, or destroy evidence can be considered spoliation of evidence and/or tampering with evidence . Spoliation is usually the civil-law / due-process variant, may involve intent or negligence , may affect

2574-412: The case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts, often on a discretionary basis . A particular court system's supreme court is its highest appellate court. Appellate courts nationwide can operate under varying rules. Under its standard of review , an appellate court decides the extent of

2640-488: The complexity of American evidence law arises from two factors: (1) the right of American defendants to have findings of fact made by a jury in practically all criminal cases as well as many civil cases; and (2) the widespread consensus that tight limitations on the admissibility of evidence are necessary to prevent a jury of untrained laypersons from being swayed by irrelevant distractions. In Professor Friedman's words: "A trained judge would not need all these rules; and indeed,

2706-465: The confession under Section 78(1) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), or under Section 73 PACE, or under common law, although in practice the confession would be excluded under section 76 PACE. Other admissible evidence may be excluded, at the discretion of the trial judge under 78 PACE, or at common law, if the judge can be persuaded that having regard to all the circumstances including how

Massachusetts Appeals Court - Misplaced Pages Continue

2772-454: The continental states, the judges determine upon the facts in dispute as well as upon the law; and they think there is no danger in their listening to evidence of hearsay, because, when they come to consider their judgment on the merits of the case, they can trust themselves entirely to disregard the hearsay evidence, or to give it any little weight which it may seem to deserve. But in England, where

2838-536: The court can be regarded as trustworthy. Hammurabi's Code had some evidence requiring an oath and witness. See specifically laws 10, 11, and 12. The Old Testament demanded at least two witnesses for conviction of a crime. Ancient Roman law allowed freedom to judges to evaluate evidence, but insisted that "proof is incumbent on the party who affirms a fact, not on him who denies it" and "no-one should be convicted on suspicion". Medieval Roman law developed an elaborate grading of degrees of evidence. Building on

2904-545: The deference it would give to the lower court's decision, based on whether the appeal were one of fact or of law. In reviewing an issue of fact, an appellate court ordinarily gives deference to the trial court's findings. It is the duty of trial judges or juries to find facts, view the evidence firsthand, and observe witness testimony . When reviewing lower decisions on an issue of fact, courts of appeal generally look for clear error. The appellate court reviews issues of law de novo (anew, no deference) and may reverse or modify

2970-402: The discretion of the trial judge if it would be unfair to the defendant to admit it. Evidence of a confession may be excluded because it was obtained by oppression or because the confession was made in consequence of anything said or done to the defendant that would be likely to make the confession unreliable. In these circumstances, it would be open to the trial judge to exclude the evidence of

3036-422: The evidence was obtained "admission of the evidence would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that the court ought not to admit it." In the United States and other countries , evidence may be excluded from a trial if it is the result of illegal activity by law enforcement, such as a search conducted without a warrant. Such illegal evidence is known as the fruit of the poisonous tree and

3102-495: The exclusion of evidence are more likely to be reversed on appeal than are relevance rulings that lead to the admission of evidence . According to Rule 401 of the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE), evidence is relevant if it has the "tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." Federal Rule 403 allows relevant evidence to be excluded "if its probative value

3168-422: The first time in the appeal. In most U.S. states, and in U.S. federal courts, parties before the court are allowed one appeal as of right. This means that a party who is unsatisfied with the outcome of a trial may bring an appeal to contest that outcome. However, appeals may be costly, and the appellate court must find an error on the part of the court below that justifies upsetting the verdict. Therefore, only

3234-478: The hearsay rule. Direct evidence is any evidence that directly proves or disproves a fact. The most well-known type of direct evidence is a testimony from an eyewitness. In eye-witness testimonies the witness states exactly what they experienced, saw, or heard. Direct evidence may also be found in the form of documents. In cases that involve a breach of contract, the contract itself would be considered direct evidence as it can directly prove or disprove that there

3300-505: The holder of the privilege a right to prevent a witness from giving testimony. These privileges are ordinarily (but not always) designed to protect socially valued types of confidential communications. Some of the privileges that are often recognized in various U.S. jurisdictions are spousal privilege , attorney–client privilege , doctor–patient privilege , state secrets privilege , and clergy–penitent privilege . A variety of additional privileges are recognized in different jurisdictions, but

3366-540: The juror serves in that capacity; and in jurisdictions with a dead man statute , a person is deemed not competent to testify as to statements of or transactions with a deceased opposing party. Often, a law will govern the rules affecting the giving of evidence by witnesses in court. An example is the Evidence Act (NSW) 1995 which sets out the procedures for witnesses to follow in New South Wales, Australia. Hearsay

SECTION 50

#1732851465168

3432-568: The jury are the sole judges of the fact, hearsay evidence is properly excluded, because no man can tell what effect it might have upon their minds." Hearsay rules have subsequently been updated numerous times. Most recently in England and Wales , the Civil Evidence Act 1995, section 1, specifically allows for admission of 'hearsay' evidence; legislation also allows for 'hearsay' evidence to be used in criminal proceedings, which makes it possible for

3498-532: The law of evidence in systems that lack a jury is short, sweet, and clear." However, Friedman's views are characteristic of an earlier generation of legal scholars. The majority of people now reject the formerly-popular proposition that the institution of trial by jury is the main reason for the existence of rules of evidence even in countries such as the United States and Australia; they argue that other variables are at work. Under English law , evidence that would otherwise be admissible at trial may be excluded at

3564-410: The list of recognized privileges varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction; for example, some jurisdictions recognize a social worker–client privilege and other jurisdictions do not. Witness competence rules are legal rules that specify circumstances under which persons are ineligible to serve as witnesses. For example, neither a judge nor a juror is competent to testify in a trial in which the judge or

3630-456: The lower court (an appeal on the record). While many appellate courts have jurisdiction over all cases decided by lower courts, some systems have appellate courts divided by the type of jurisdiction they exercise. Some jurisdictions have specialized appellate courts, such as the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals , which only hears appeals raised in criminal cases, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for

3696-409: The lower court made the correct legal determinations, rather than hearing direct evidence and determining what the facts of the case were. Furthermore, U.S. appellate courts are usually restricted to hearing appeals based on matters that were originally brought up before the trial court. Hence, such an appellate court will not consider an appellant's argument if it is based on a theory that is raised for

3762-400: The lower court's decision if the appellate court believes the lower court misapplied the facts or the law. An appellate court may also review the lower judge's discretionary decisions, such as whether the judge properly granted a new trial or disallowed evidence. The lower court's decision is only changed in cases of an " abuse of discretion ". This standard tends to be even more deferential than

3828-439: The matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's determination that the action appealed from should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified. Depending on the type of case and the decision below, appellate review primarily consists of: an entirely new hearing (a non trial de novo ); a hearing where the appellate court gives deference to factual findings of the lower court; or review of particular legal rulings made by

3894-447: The out-of-trial statement) is true. For example, prior to trial Bob says, "Jane went to the store." If the party offering this statement as evidence at trial is trying to prove that Jane actually went to the store, the statement is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. However, at both common law and under evidence codifications such as the Federal Rules of Evidence , there are dozens of exemptions from and exceptions to

3960-437: The outcome of a case in which the evidence is material, and may or may not result in criminal prosecution . Tampering is usually the criminal law variant in which a person alters, conceals, falsifies, or destroys evidence to interfere with a law-enforcement, governmental, or regulatory investigation, and is usually defined as a crime . Parallel construction is the creation of an untruthful, but plausible, explanation for how

4026-408: The quality of proof is how reliable such evidence should be considered. Important rules that govern admissibility concern hearsay , authentication , relevance , privilege , witnesses , opinions , expert testimony , identification and rules of physical evidence . There are various standards of evidence, standards showing how strong the evidence must be to meet the legal burden of proof in

SECTION 60

#1732851465168

4092-407: The relevance of at least some types of expert evidence – particularly evidence from the hard sciences – requires particularly rigorous, or in any event more arcane reasoning than is usually needed or expected. There is a general agreement that judgments of relevance are largely within the discretion of the trial court – although relevance rulings that lead to

4158-507: The state supreme court. The High Court has appellate jurisdiction over all other courts. Leave must be granted by the court, before the appeal matter is heard. The High Court is paramount to all federal courts. Further, it has an constitutionally entrenched general power of appeal from the Supreme Courts of the States and Territories . Appeals to the High Court are by special leave only, which

4224-406: Was breach of contract. Circumstantial evidence , however, is evidence that does not point directly to a fact and requires an inference in order to prove that fact. A common example of the distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence involves a person who comes into a building, when it may be raining. If the person declares, "It's raining outside", that statement is direct evidence that it

4290-534: Was known as the Court of Appeals, and the Appellate Court of Maryland was known as the Court of Special Appeals, until a 2022 constitutional amendment changed their names. Depending on the system, certain courts may serve as both trial courts and appellate courts, hearing appeals of decisions made by courts with more limited jurisdiction. Evidence (law) The quantum of evidence is the amount of evidence needed;

4356-484: Was the role of the jury as a finder of fact, as opposed to the role of the judge as finder of law. The creation of modern jury trials in the 16th and 17th centuries necessitated rules of evidence to regulate what testimony and other evidence could be put before the jury. While much of the early common law evidence rules came from judicial decisions, the English Parliament also played a role. In 1677, Parliament and

#167832