CA Bar Exam 練習答案: Evidence (July 2010)

Bar Review Course作成のEssay答案は完璧すぎ＆長すぎて参考にならないという方向けに、過去に書きためた答案を公開していきます。公開するのは、私が実際に1時間計って解いた答案を、ギリギリ合格ラインまたは合格ライン少し上になるように手直ししたものです。手直しにあたっては某Bar Review Courseの採点表を参照していますが、あくまで自己採点なのでその点はご承知おき下さい。

今回はJuly 2010のQ3, Evidenceです。論点盛り盛りで時間が足りなくなること必至の問題です。

July 2010 Question 3
https://nwculaw.edu/pdf/bar/July%202010%20Essays%20and%20Sample%20Answers.pdf

David and Vic were farmers with adjoining property. They had been fighting for several years about water rights.

In May, Vic and his wife, Wanda, were sitting in the kitchen when Vic received a telephone call. During the call, Vic became quite angry. As soon as he hung up, he said the following to Wanda: “That rat, David, just called and told me that he was going to make me sorry! He used some sort of machine to disguise his voice, but I know it was him!”

In June, Wanda and Vic passed a truck driven by David, who made an obscene gesture as they drove by. Vic immediately stopped and yelled that if David wanted a fight, then that was what he was going to get. Both men jumped out of their trucks. After an exchange of blows, David began strangling Vic. Vic collapsed and died from a massive heart attack. David was charged with manslaughter in California Superior Court.

At David’s trial, the prosecution called Wanda, who testified about Vic’s description of the May telephone call.

During cross-examination of Wanda, the defense introduced into evidence a certified copy of a felony perjury conviction Vic had suffered in 2007.

The prosecution then introduced into evidence a certified copy of a misdemeanor simple assault conviction David had suffered in 2006.

During the defense’s case, David claimed that he acted in self-defense. He testified that he knew about two other fights involving Vic. In the first, which took place four years before his death, Vic broke a man’s arm with a tire iron. In the other, which occurred two years before his death, Vic threatened a woman with a gun. David testified that he had heard about the first incident before June, but that he had not heard about the second incident until after his trial had commenced.

Assuming that all appropriate objections were timely made, should the California Superior Court have admitted:

1. Wanda’s testimony about Vic’s statement regarding the May phone call? Discuss.
2. The certified copy of Vic’s 2007 felony perjury conviction? Discuss.
3. The certified copy of David’s 2006 misdemeanor simple assault conviction? Discuss.
4. David’s testimony about the first fight involving Vic breaking another man’s arm with a tire iron? Discuss.
5. David’s testimony about the second fight involving Vic threatening a woman with a gun? Discuss.
Answer according to California law.

答案