Michigan’s Rules of Evidence, established by the Supreme Court, dictate how evidence is presented and admitted in court proceedings. Rules 1001 through 1008, focusing on how written words, recordings, and photographs are treated as evidence.
Rule 1001: Defining the Terms
Before diving into details, Rule 1001 lays the groundwork by defining key terms:
- Writing: Any combination of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent, regardless of format (handwritten, digital, etc.).
- Recording: Similar to writing, but encompassing sounds captured in any form (audio tapes, digital recordings, etc.).
- Photograph: An image or its equivalent stored in any format (printed photographs, digital files, etc.).
- Original: The primary version of a writing, recording, or photograph, or an authorized duplicate intended to have the same effect. For electronic information, a printout or other readable output that accurately reflects the data constitutes an original.
Rule 1002: The Quest for the Original
Generally, Rule 1002 emphasizes using the original document, recording, or photograph as evidence. This ensures authenticity and accuracy. However, exceptions exist:
- Duplicates: If the original is unavailable or difficult to produce, a duplicate (exact copy) certified by the custodian of the original is admissible.
- Voluminous Materials: For extensive records like business ledgers, summaries or compilations prepared by a qualified witness using the original are acceptable.
- Lost or Destroyed Originals: Proof of loss or destruction, coupled with secondary evidence like copies or witness testimony, might allow entry of non-originals.
Rule 1003: Duplicates Step Up in Absence of Originals
When the original is unavailable and exceptions in Rule 1002 don’t apply, certified duplicates take center stage under Rule 1003. However, the opposing party has the right to challenge the authenticity of the duplicate.
Have your rights been violated?
Have your driving priviledges been revoked?
Has your professional license been suspended?
Second Amendment rights taken away?
Have you been charged with a crime?
Call our office to see if we can help
Komorn Law 248-357-2550
Rule 1004: When Copies Don’t Cut It
If neither the original nor a certified duplicate are available, Rule 1004 allows “other evidence of contents.” This could include oral testimony about the contents, copies not certified by the custodian, or even handwritten notes summarizing the original. However, such evidence faces a higher bar for admissibility due to concerns about accuracy and trustworthiness.
Rule 1005: Public Documents Take a Shortcut
For publicly available documents like government records, certified copies readily obtainable from the custodian bypass the original requirement under Rule 1005.
Rule 1006: Summaries of voluminous records get a green light
Rule 1006 reiterates the allowance for summaries of voluminous records if the original would be cumbersome to present. Here, the summary must be prepared by a qualified witness accurately reflecting the original’s substance.
Rule 1007: Parties Can Speak for Their Words
Rule 1007 empowers parties in a case to testify about the contents of their own writings, recordings, or photographs. This helps clarify ambiguities or resolve questions about intent.
Rule 1008: Judge and Jury Take Their Roles
Finally, Rule 1008 clarifies how judges and juries handle certain issues:
- The judge decides whether certain conditions are met for admitting evidence of contents under these rules.
- The jury decides if the writing ever existed, if a presented document is the original, or if secondary evidence accurately reflects the content.
These eight rules form the foundation for handling written, recorded, and photographic evidence in Michigan courts. Remember, this is just a summary; actual legal proceedings should involve consulting legal professionals for accurate interpretation and application of these rules.
Important:
This article provides a simplified overview of the Michigan Rules of Evidence for informational purposes only. It should not be interpreted as legal advice. When facing legal matters, always consult with a qualified attorney for professional guidance.
The Michigan Rules of Evidence are subject to change over time. Always consult the latest official version for accurate information.
Here is the link to the Michigan Rules of Evidence Handbook. Check the footer for the latest update.
Here is the link to proposed changes Michigan Court Website
Related Articles (see more posts after)
No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
More Posts
Komorn AVVO Reviews
Research no further, call Komorn. 5.0 stars Posted by a client December 31, 2015 Hired attorney After an incident involving my medical marihuana grow, I found myself being charged with 2 manufacturing felonies. Upon a recommendation from an associate, I retained...
Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee
The Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan’s Award Committee has selected Michael J. Komorn as the recipient of their Right to Counsel Award. This award recognizes the amazing contributions of a group or individual in the form of legal representation or other...
Judge dismissed felony charge against medical marijuana patient Max Lorincz
OTTAWA COUNTY, Mich. – After 16 months of a criminal and family court battle, an Ottawa County Circuit Court Judge dismissed wrongful felony charges against a Spring Lake father and card-carrying medical marijuana patient for having “synthetic THC.” Friday Max...
Southfield attorneys accuse MSP Crime Lab of negligence and incompetence
Two local attorneys have filed a formal complaint against the Michigan State Police Crime Lab, suggesting the agency should be made into an independent entity, but state officials have refuted the accusations of negligence and incompetence. Southfield-based...
Forensic scientists blast State Police crime lab THC policy as man fights to get son back
Maxwell Lorincz lives in Spring Lake near Lake Michigan with his wife and their six-year-old son. At least, they did live with their son, until a year and a half ago. They lost custody of him after Lorincz was charged with a felony for possessing synthetic THC....
People v Redden & Clark – MI Medical Marijuana hearing – February 20 2013
During this February 20, 2013 hearing, Assistant Oakland County Prosecutor Beth Hand notified the court that her office is contemplating filing criminal charges against a medical doctor for his involvement in certifying two medical marijuana patients, Robert Redden...
Medical marijuana lawyers want state crime lab moved out of Michigan State Police
"The attorneys claim the policy change is leading to unfair felony charges for patients who would otherwise face misdemeanors." Posted on MichiganRadio.org A group of criminal defense attorneys says the Michigan State Police (MSP) should no longer...
Defense attorneys seek fed inquiry of MSP crime labs
Southfield — Three defense attorneys are asking the federal government to investigate the Michigan State Police crime laboratories, alleging misconduct in their testing for pending drug cases. Southfield defense attorneys Neil Rockind and Michael Komorn, along...
MI Cops Change Policy So They Can Falsely Imprison Legal Pot Smokers
In 2008, an overwhelming majority of Michigan voters approved legislation to legalize marijuana for medical use in the state. With nearly 50,000 Michigan residents arrested and incarcerated each year for controlled substance violations, the state’s prison industrial...
Attorney Alleges Authorities `Bend The Science’ To Elevate Marijuana Cases
MIRS-Michigan Independent Source Of News and Information Friday Nov 6, 2015 Maxwell LORINCZ, of Spring Lake, says a fingerprint of oil on an empty plastic container led to his arrest on a drug charge on Sept. 24, 2014. Now, a year later, the case that might have...