The Michigan Rules of Evidence are the rules adopted by the Michigan Supreme Court to govern evidentiary processes throughout Michigan’s judicial system.

Occasionally, the Rules of Evidence require amendments or changes. You can access proposed and recently-adopted orders affecting the Rules of Evidence from this page. There are also more links below at the end of this article.

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Have your driving priviledges been revoked?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

Proposed Amendments of MRE 702 and 804 2022-30 –

Proposed Amendment of the Michigan Rules of Evidence 2021-10 –

Proposed Amendment of the Michigan Rules of Evidence

Would restyle the MREs in an effort to remain as consistent as possible with the 2011 restyling of the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Proposed Amendments of Rule 410 of the Michigan Rules of Evidence 2020-29 –

Access Other Proposed & Recently-Adopted Orders

Michigan Court Rules: Chapter 1 | Chapter 2 | Chapter 3 | Chapter 4 | Chapter 5 | Chapter 6 | Chapter 7 | Chapter 8 | Chapter 9

Michigan Rules of Evidence | Administrative Orders | Local Court Rules | Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct | Rules Concerning the State Bar | Rules for the Board of Law Examiners | Code of Judicial Conduct | Michigan Continuing Judicial Education 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

More Posts

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)

More Posts

Michigan Rules 901-903 – Evidence Authentication

Ever wondered how that document or recording made its way into a Michigan courtroom? The answer lies in Michigan Rules of Evidence 901 to 903, which govern the crucial step of authenticating evidence.

This article provides a factual, no-nonsense breakdown of these rules, drawing insights from the official Michigan Rules of Evidence Handbook.

Rule 901: The Key to Admission

At its core, Rule 901 states that before any evidence can be considered by the court, it must be properly authenticated.

This means proving, through sufficient evidence, that the item is indeed what it’s claimed to be. Think of it as verifying the identity of a witness before they can testify.

The rule doesn’t prescribe a specific method for authentication; it simply says there must be enough evidence to convince the judge that the item is genuine. This flexibility provides room for various situations and evidence types.

Unlocking Authenticity: Examples from the Handbook

The Handbook offers helpful examples to illustrate how Rule 901 might be satisfied in practice. Here are a few:

• Witness Testimony: Someone with firsthand knowledge of the evidence, like the author of a document or someone who witnessed a recording being made, can testify to its authenticity.

• Handwriting Analysis: A non-expert familiar with someone’s handwriting can offer their opinion on its genuineness based on familiarity, not just for this specific case.

• Comparison by Experts: An expert, like a handwriting analyst or audio-visual specialist, can compare the disputed item to known authentic samples.

• Distinctive Characteristics: The unique features of the evidence itself, like its internal patterns or specific content, can sometimes establish authenticity in conjunction with other circumstances.

• Voice Identification: Similar to handwriting, someone familiar with a voice can offer their opinion on its identity based on prior interactions.

• Telephone Conversations: Proof that a call was made to a specific number assigned to a particular person or business, coupled with self-identification during the call, can authenticate the conversation.

Have your rights been violated?
Have your driving priviledges been revoked?
Has your professional license been suspended?
Have you been charged with a crime?

Call our office to see if we can help
Komorn Law  248-357-2550

Rule 902: Self-Authentication Shortcuts

Certain types of evidence are so inherently reliable that they “speak for themselves” and don’t require additional authentication under Rule 901. Rule 902 lists these self-authenticating items, including government publications, certain business records, and certificates of marriage or birth.

Rule 903: Skipping the Witness in Certain Cases

Traditionally, written documents often required the testimony of a subscribing witness (someone who witnessed the signing) to be admitted. However, Rule 903 simplifies matters by stating that such testimony is unnecessary unless specifically required by other relevant laws.

Remember: These are just summaries, and the actual rules contain nuances and exceptions. For complex legal matters, consulting with a lawyer is always recommended.

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.

• You can find the latest versions of these resources on the Michigan Courts website: https://www.courts.michigan.gov/498aa6/siteassets/rules-instructions-administrative-orders/rules-of-evidence/michigan-rules-of-evidence.pdf

Related Articles

More Posts

Michigan Rules of Evidence 801-807 Hearsay:

In the courtroom, truth-finding is paramount. Yet, not every statement offered as evidence directly reveals the truth. Enter the realm of hearsay, statements made out of court, and the complex rules governing their admissibility. In Michigan, Rules of Evidence 801-807 serve as the gatekeepers, determining which hearsay statements can cross the threshold and be heard by the jury.

Rule 801: Hearsay and its Exceptions

The battle begins with understanding the enemy – hearsay. Rule 801 defines it as a statement:

• Made outside of court: The statement cannot be made during the current trial or hearing by the person who made it (the declarant).
• Offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted: The statement’s purpose is not just to narrate an event, but to convince the jury of the truth of the matter it describes.

However, not all out-of-court statements are hearsay. Rule 801 itself provides several exceptions:

• Present sense impressions: Statements made about an ongoing event or sensation perceived by the declarant are admissible. Imagine a witness describing a car accident as it unfolds.
• Excited utterances: Statements made under the stress of a startling event, while still fresh in the declarant’s mind, can be admitted. Think of a person’s immediate cry for help after being robbed.
• State of mind: Statements revealing the declarant’s then-existing state of mind, such as intent, belief, or emotion, are admissible. For example, a suicide note expressing the writer’s intent to end their life.

Rule 802: The General Hearsay Ban – A Wall with Cracks

While Rule 801 identifies the enemy, Rule 802 raises the barricades. It generally prohibits the admission of hearsay, recognizing the inherent danger of relying on uncross-examined statements. However, the rule isn’t a fortress—cracks exist in the form of numerous exceptions.

These exceptions fall into two broad categories:

• Unavailability of the declarant: When the declarant is unavailable to testify in court due to death, illness, or other legitimate reasons, certain hearsay statements become admissible. This includes prior statements made under oath (depositions or testimonies in other proceedings), dying declarations, and statements against interest.
• Reliability and trustworthiness: Even if the declarant is available, certain types of hearsay are admitted due to their inherent reliability and trustworthiness. These include business records, medical records, family records, public records, and certain statements about personal or family history.

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

Rules 803-806 – A Spectrum of Exceptions

Each exception in Rules 803-806 has its own specific requirements and nuances. For instance, Rule 803(a) allows business records to be admitted if they were kept in the regular course of business and meet certain foundational requirements. Rule 803(b) permits excited utterances only if made under the immediate stress of a startling event, while Rule 803(c) allows statements against interest if the declarant would have reasonably expected the statement to harm their legal position.

These rules provide a spectrum of exceptions, balancing the need for reliable evidence with the concerns over hearsay’s inherent dangers. Navigating this spectrum requires careful consideration of the specific facts and circumstances of each case.

Rule 807: The Residual Exception – A Last Resort

Even after considering all established exceptions, some cases may still involve crucial hearsay evidence not neatly categorized. This is where Rule 807, the residual exception, steps in. It allows for the admission of hearsay that doesn’t fall under any other exception, but only if it meets four strict conditions:

• Equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness: The statement must have indicia of reliability comparable to those of the established exceptions.
• Material fact: The statement must be relevant to a significant issue in the case.
• More probative than any other available evidence: The statement must be the best evidence available on the issue at hand.
• Serves the purposes of these rules and the interests of justice: Admitting the statement must ultimately advance the goals of fair and just adjudication.

The residual exception is a powerful tool, but its use is limited and subject to careful judicial scrutiny.

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.

Related Articles

More Posts

Opinions – Everyone’s got one or two or three: A Look at Michigan Rules of Evidence 701-707

Lay Versus Expert Opinions (Rules 701 & 702)

Before delving into specific rules, it’s crucial to establish the fundamental distinction between lay witnesses and expert witnesses.

Lay witnesses are individuals with everyday experiences and observations, while experts possess specialized knowledge, skill, or training in a particular field.

This distinction directly impacts the admissibility and weight given to their opinions.

Rule 701 governs lay witness opinions. Here, opinions are only admissible if they are:

• Rationally based on the witness’s personal perceptions: This means the opinion must stem directly from the witness’s observations of the events or circumstances in question. For example, a witness can testify that a car “looked like it was speeding” if they observed its excessive speed firsthand.

• Helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’s testimony or to determining a fact in issue: The opinion should shed light on the witness’s observations or assist the jury in comprehending the facts of the case. An example would be a witness stating that a certain behavior “made me feel threatened” when explaining their emotional state during an incident.

Rule 702, on the other hand, empowers expert witnesses to offer opinions based on their specialized knowledge. However, their testimony must meet four key criteria:

• Relevance: The expert’s knowledge and opinion must be relevant to the specific issues at hand in the case.

• Reliability: The expert’s field of expertise, methodology, and conclusions must be grounded in reliable principles and methods recognized by the relevant scientific community.

• Factual Basis: The expert’s opinion must be based on sufficient facts or data, either presented in evidence or personally observed.

• Application: The expert must reliably apply their expertise and methods to the specific facts of the case at hand.

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 703 provides further clarity on the sources of an expert’s opinion. Experts can base their opinions on facts or data in the case they have been made aware of or personally observed, even if not yet formally admitted into evidence. This allows for greater flexibility in utilizing their expertise.

Rule 704 addresses the question of “ultimate issues.” Opinions are not inadmissible simply because they touch upon the core question of the case, known as the “ultimate issue.” For example, in a medical malpractice case, an expert may be able to offer an opinion on whether the doctor’s actions fell below the standard of care, even though this goes directly to the heart of the jury’s decision.

Rule 705 deals with the timing of the disclosure of the factual basis for an expert’s opinion. Generally, experts can state their opinion and its rationale without first disclosing the underlying facts or data. However, the opposing party may have the opportunity to delve into these details during cross-examination, ensuring transparency and allowing the jury to assess the basis of the opinion.

Rule 706 empowers the court to appoint independent expert witnesses in certain situations. This might occur when both parties present conflicting expert opinions, or when the court deems neutral expertise crucial for fair and balanced adjudication.

Finally, Rule 707 governs the use of learned treatises for impeachment purposes. Learned treatises are scholarly publications in a field of expertise. This rule allows for cross-examining expert witnesses by bringing to their attention statements in reputable treatises that contradict their testimony. However, these treatises are not admissible as standalone evidence and can only be read into the record for impeachment purposes.

The Impact of Opinion Testimony: Weighing the Scales

Understanding the intricacies of Rules 701-707 highlights the delicate dance between lay and expert opinions in the courtroom. These rules safeguard against unreliable or prejudicial pronouncements while enabling the valuable contribution of both everyday understanding and specialized knowledge. The jury ultimately acts as the arbiter of fact, tasked with weighing the credibility and persuasiveness of all opinions presented, whether from lay witnesses or experts.

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.

Related Articles

More Posts