"Democracy must be learned by each generation."

1. Personally meet your teams prior to local mock trials.
2. Advise youth teams how to prepare their case for trial.
3. Help youth teams understand rudimentary aspects of trial procedure, rules of evidence, and courtroom decorum.
4. Attend local mock trial competition, as a spectator only.
5. Critique youth teams' performance following trial and offer suggestions for improvement.

Adult Supervision. One responsible adult must accompany each pair of teams selected to argue during State Judiciary Competition. Although arrangements will be made in Montgomery for conducting the Program, the students' learning experience can be heightened if they are also accompanied to Montgomery by the member of the local bar association with whom they have been working throughout the school year.

Student attorneys and witnesses will be required to invest substantial time in the Program. Accordingly, careful consideration should be given to selecting students with the time, ability and interest to benefit from the Program.

Teams should be registered as soon as they are formed. Delegations must bring a balanced set of teams in regards to Plaintiff and Defense (for example 2 Plaintif and 2 Defense teams. If a team has an odd number, including 1, they shall contact the state office to determine if their team will be Plaintiff or Defense.

STEPS IN YOUTH JUDICIAL PROGRAM

STEP 1 -- Registration and Organization
Students interested in participating in the Youth Judicial Program should register through their YMCA staff advisor or high school government club sponsor. Conference Registration can be found at www.alyig.org. Each team will consist of three (3) lawyers and three (3) witnesses. Teams may also have 1 or 2 alternates. Some students may wish to run for the position of judge. In order to qualify as a judicial candidate, potential student judges must have participated one (1) year previously in the Youth Judicial Program as a lawyer, a witness, a bailiff, or a judge. Registration material should be available to all adult advisors with the Hi-Y Program, Student YMCA, or participating high school government clubs.

STEP 2 -- Pre-Judicial Training
All participants in the Youth Judicial Program should attend district Pre-Judicial meetings. At these sessions, practicing attorneys will provide a helpful and educational program for the various roles involved in the trial process. Student judges and nominees for Chief Justice are elected at the pre-judicial sessions.

STEP 3 -- Case Preparation
Following the Pre-Judicial meetings, student attorneys and their witness are to prepare for the trial of the case. The witnesses should become very familiar with the contents of their written statement in the trial program material. Attorneys should prepare opening statements, direct examination for their teams' witnesses, cross examination for the opposing team's witnesses, and a closing argument. (Please see the trial manual.)

STEP 4 -- Officer Training
All elected judges and their bailiffs will attend an officer training session to be held at Camp Chandler in Wetumpka, Alabama. At this time, the elected judges will be trained on the proper method for scoring the attorneys and witnesses. Each judge will appoint their own bailiff after elected. All bailiffs must attend this session with their respective judges.

STEP 5 – Local Mock Trial
Each school or city participating in the Youth Judicial Program should make arrangements for at least one (1) mock trial, or ‘scrimmage’ prior to State Competition. Local attorneys may be utilized in advance to make arrangements for the use of local courthouses. It is also suggested that local attorneys arrange to have "real" Judges preside at these local mock trials. It is recommended that the local mock trials be held at least two (2) weeks before the final competition.

STEP 6 -- State Competition
All teams will meet in Montgomery for the three day competition program. Each team will participate in at least four (4) trials. A tournament style bracket of competing trial teams will lead to the ultimate round of competition. The preliminary rounds of competition will be held in the Montgomery County Court House. In addition to the trial competition, Student participants will enjoy social events such as a dance and final awards banquet.

RULES OF THE YMCA YOUTH JUDICIAL PROGRAM

All information contained in this document shall be considered a rule of the competition even if it is listed as advice, suggestions, etc.

1. TEAM PRESENTATIONS
1. All teams shall consist of six members--three attorneys and three witnesses.
2. Teams may make gender changes in the witnesses. However, no gender change will be allowed of a witness that would materially alter the demeanor of the case.
3. Each team may have two additional members to act as alternates. These alternates may be used in any fashion the coaches choose.
4. The Statement of Facts and any additional given stipulations may not be disputed at trial.
5. Certain witnesses are stipulated as experts and their expert qualifications for the purpose for which they are testifying may not be challenged or impeached by the opposing side. Their testimony concerning the facts of the case, however, may be challenged. There will be no voir dire of the expert witnesses allowed.
6. Each witness is bound by the facts in the given witness statement. All participants agree that the witness statements are signed and sworn affidavits.
   
   Witnesses will adhere to their written affidavits. No additional material may be included. No material changes have incurred since the giving of the sworn affidavits.
7. Invention of Facts: On direct examination, the witness is limited to the facts given. If a witness testified in contradiction of a fact in the witness statement, the opposition must show this on cross-examination through correct use of the affidavit for impeachment.
   
   Invention of Facts: If the attorney who is cross-examining the witness asks a question, the answer of which is not contained in the stipulated affidavit or in the direct examination, then the witness may respond to that question with any answer as long as it is not contrary to the affidavit.
   
   If the answer by the witness is contrary to the stipulated affidavit, the cross-examination attorney may impeach the witness.
   
   Attorneys should always feel free to request bench conference to clear up any procedural or factual questions.
8. Witnesses are not permitted to use notes in testifying during the trial.
9. Student attorneys must participate with a presentation in the trial as follows:
1. Each attorney must examine one witness on direct examination and one witness on cross-examination
2. The attorney giving the opening statement will not be allowed to give the closing statement.
3. Attorneys are limited to calling only their witnesses.
4. All witnesses must be called.
5. Objections will be permitted by the direct or cross-examining attorney only.
10. Attorneys may use notes in presenting their cases.
11. To permit judges to hear and see better, attorneys will stand during opening and closing statements, direct and cross-examination and all objections. A judge may interrupt an attorney's opening or closing statement to ask questions. The judge may not, however, question the witnesses.
12. All participants are expected to display proper courtroom decorum and good sportsmanlike conduct. Appropriate dress is required.
13. No objections may be made during the closing arguments.
14. A team may choose to reserve time for a rebuttal on closing arguments.
15. There will be no props or visual aides whatsoever.
16. At the conclusion of each trial, the courtrooms will be cleared. It may be necessary to also clear the courthouse.
2. TIME LIMITS
1. The time guidelines should be used by all teams in preparing their cases. Judges will be notified of these guidelines, and will strictly hold the students to them.
2. Time for bench conferences and extensive questioning from the judge will not be counted as part of the allotted time during examination of witnesses and opening and closing statements.
3. Each judge will provide a bailiff to act as timekeeper during the trial. These persons will be responsible to notify the judges when time has expired. He/she will do so by saying once, "Time has expired."
   The students talking must stop whether in the middle of a question, answer or statement. The judge may then elect to allow the student to complete a question and answer, an answer, or sentence.
4. Bailiffs will use time cards displaying unused time segments. These may be in increments of "4 min", "3 min", "2 min", "1 min', "STOP."
3. TIME GUIDELINES FOR TRIALS

The trial sequences and time guidelines are as follows:
1. Opening statement – prosecution/plaintiff …3 minutes
2. Opening statement - defense …3 minutes
3. Direct examination of prosecution's witness #1 …5 minutes
4. Cross-examination of prosecution's witness #1 …3 minutes
5. Direct examination of prosecution's witness #2 …5 minutes
6. Cross-examination of prosecution's witness #2 …3 minutes
7. Direct examination of prosecution's witness #3 …5 minutes
8. Cross-examination of prosecution's witness #3 …3 minutes
9. Direct examination of defense's witness #1 …5 minutes
10. Cross-examination of defense's witness #1 …3 minutes
11. Direct examination of defense's witness #2 …5 minutes
12. Cross-examination of defense's witness #2 …3 minutes
13. Direct examination of defense's witness #3 …5 minutes
14. Cross-examination of defense's witness #3 …3 minutes
15. Prosecution/Plaintiff closing argument …5 minutes
16. Defense's closing argument …5 minutes
17. Jury Deliberation …10 minutes
NOTE: Redirect and recross examination will be allowed for each witness. This is optional and is subtracted from direct and cross-examination time for each witness.

The Opening of the Court

• Either the Bailiff of the Court or the Judge will call to order.
• When the Judge enters, all participants should remain standing until the judge is seated.
• The case will be announced, i.e., "The Court will now hear the case of _______________ versus __________________."
• The judge will then ask each side if they are ready.

Opening Statements         Prosecution/Plaintiff followed by Defense  

Objective:  To acquaint the judge with the case and outline what you are going to prove through witness testimony and the admission of evidence.

After introducing himself/herself and colleagues to the judge, each side summarizes the evidence which will be presented to prove the case.

Advise in Preparing:

What should be included?

1. a short summary of facts
2. mention of the burden of proof (the amount of evidence needed to prove a fact) and who has it in the case
3. the applicable law
4. a clear and concise overview of the witnesses and physical evidence you will present and how each will contribute to proving your case
5. know your case inside and out
6. it is essential that you appear confident in your case
7. eye contact with the jury is recommended
8. use the future tense in describing what you will do (e.g., "the facts will show", "our witnesses' testimony will prove" etc.)

Other Suggestions:

1. frequently attorneys introduce their colleagues by saying, "Your Honor, my name is ____________.  My colleagues are _______________."
2. don't ever promise to prove something you won't or aren't able to
3. write a clear, concise and well organized statement

Direct Examination            Prosecution/Plaintiff witnesses followed by Defense witnesses

Objective:  To obtain information from favorable witnesses you call in order to prove the facts of your case.

Rules:
            Every person listed as a witness in the mock trial is deemed competent to be a witness.  However, a witness may not testify to a matter unless the materials supply evidence sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the subject matter of the testimony.  Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the witness's own testimony.  There is an exception to this concerning opinion testimony by expert witnesses which will be addressed below.

Procedure:
The prosecutor or plaintiff's attorney conducts direct examination (questioning) of each of its own witnesses.  At this time, testimony and other evidence to prove the prosecution's or plaintiff's case will be presented.  The purpose of direct examination is to allow the witness to narrate the facts in support of the case.

The attorneys for both sides, on both direct and cross-examinations, should remember that their own function is to ask questions: attorneys themselves may not testify or give evidence, and they must avoid phrasing questions in a way that might violate this rule.

1. Form of questions:  Witnesses may not be asked leading questions by the attorney who calls them.  A leading question is one that suggests to the witness the answer desired by the examiner, and often suggests a "yes" or "no" answer.  Direct questions generally are phrased to evoke a set of facts from the witness.

Example of a direct question: 
"Mrs. Dillon, what was your impression of Mr. Taylor’s appearance on the job?"
Example of a leading question: 
"Mrs. Dillon, did Mr. Taylor ever come to work in sloppy clothes?"

2. Narration:  While the purpose of direct examination is to get the witness to tell a story, the question must ask for specific information.  The questions must not be so broad that the witness is allowed to wander or "narrate" a whole story.  Narrative questions are objectionable.

Example of a narrative question: 
"Mrs. Gray, what happened when Mr. Taylor came to work at Lance?"

Narrative answers:  At times, a direct question may be appropriate, but the witness' answer may go beyond the facts for which the question asked.  Such answers are subject to objection on the grounds of narration.

3. Scope of witness examination:  Direct examination may cover all facts relevant to the case of which the witness has first-hand knowledge.  Any factual areas examined on direct examination may be subject to cross-examination.
4. Character:  For mock trial purposes, evidence about the character of a party may not be introduced unless the person's character is an issue in the case.  For example, whether one spouse has been unfaithful to another is a relevant issue in a civil trial for divorce, but is not an issue in a criminal trial for larceny.

Similarly, a person's violent temper may be relevant in a criminal trial for assault, but is not an issue in a civil trial for breach of contract.

5. Refreshing Recollection:  If a witness is unable to recall a statement made in the affidavit, or if the witness contradicts the affidavit, the attorney on direct may seek to introduce into evidence that portion of the affidavit that will help the witness to remember.  (See Part B.5 on introduction of evidence).

Advise in Preparing (for Attorneys):

1. isolate exactly what information each witness can contribute to proving your case and prepare a series of questions designed to obtain the information
2. be sure all items you need to prove your case will be presented through your witnesses
3. try to keep the questions you've practiced with your witnesses and ask a limited number
4. be able to think quickly if the witness gives you an unexpected answer and add a short follow-up to be sure you obtain the testimony you wanted
5. be relaxed and clear in the presentation of your questions
6. listen to the answers
7. if you need a moment to think, ask the judge if you can discuss a point with your co-counsel for a moment
8. exceptions to this rule, i.e., questioning on matters such as name, address, occupation)
9. practice with your witness
10. don't ask questions requiring opinion testimony, unless witness has been certified expert by the court
11. avoid asking leading questions (there are of course a few generally accepted
12. be sure to have all documents marked for identification before you refer to them at trial.  Then refer to them as exhibit A, etc.  After you have finished using it, if it all helps your case, ask the judge to admit it as evidence.  Each courtroom will have an authentic set of evidence and witness statements.  These are the only ones that are allowed to be shown to the witness, judge, jury, etc. during trial.

Advice in Preparing (for Witnesses):

1. learning the case inside and out, especially your witness statement (or deposition)
2. know the questions that your side's attorney will ask and prepare clear and convincing answers that contain the information that the attorney is trying to elicit from your testimony
3. practice with the attorney that will direct you
4. be as relaxed and in control as possible, an appearance of confidence and trustworthiness is important
5. don't read or recite your witness statement verbatim
6. be sure that your testimony is never inconsistent with the facts set forth in your witness statement (or deposition)
7. don't panic if the attorney or judge asks you a question you haven't rehearsed
8. look at the jury when answering questions

Cross-Examination
Objective:  To make the other side's witnesses less believable in the eyes of the trier of fact.
After the prosecutor's (or plaintiff's) attorney has completed questioning each witness, the judge then allows the other party (i.e., defense attorney) to cross-examine the witness.  The cross-examiner seeks to clarify or cast doubt upon the testimony of opposing witnesses.  Inconsistency in stories, bias, and other damaging facts may be pointed out to the jury through cross-examination.

Rules:
Cross-examination is the questioning by an attorney form the opposing side of the case.  Cross-examination is not limited and may cover the subject matter of the direct examination, matters affecting the credibility of the witness and additional matters, otherwise available, that were not covered on direct examination.  Leading questions are permissible on cross-examination.

Procedure:

1. Form of questions:  An attorney may ask leading questions when cross-examining the opponent's witnesses.  Questions tending to evoke a narrative answer should be avoided (these usually begin with "how", "why", or "explain").

Example of a leading question:  "Dr. Miller, isn't it true that you had reason to suspect that Nurse Dillon was treating Mr. Taylor unfairly?"

Scope of witness examination:  Attorneys may ask questions that are not part of the direct of that witness.  

2. Impeachment:  On cross-examination, the attorney may want to show the court that the witness should not be believed.  This is called impeaching the witness.  It may be done by asking questions about their prior conduct that makes the witness's credibility (truth-telling ability) doubtful.  Other times, it may be done by asking about evidence of certain types of criminal convictions.  Impeachment may also be done by introducing the witness' affidavit, and asking the witness whether he or she has contradicted something which was stated in the affidavit.

Example:  (Prior Conduct):  "Is it true that you beat your nephew when he was six years old and broke his arm?"

Example:  (Past Conviction):  "Is it true that you've been convicted of assault?"

(Note:  These types of questions may only be asked when the questioning attorney has information that indicates that the conduct actually happened, such as their witness statement or evidence that has been admitted.)

The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including under certain circumstances the party calling the witness.  This is an attempt by an attorney to show the Court that the witness should not be believed.  A witness's credibility may be impeached by showing evidence of the witness's character and conduct, prior convictions, and prior inconsistent statement.

1. Evidence of Character and Conduct

The credibility of a witness may be attacked or following an attack, supported, by evidence of opinion or reputation subject to two limitations.  First, the evidence may refer only to the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness.  Second, the evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the character of the witness for truthfulness has been attacked by opinion or reputation evidence or otherwise.

2. Impeachment by Evidence of a Crime

For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from the witness or established by public record during cross-examination, but only if the crime was: (1) punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year under the law which the witness was convicted, and the Court determines that the probative value of admitting the evidence overweighs its prejudicial effect to the defendant or (2) involved dishonesty or false statements regardless of the punishment.

Advice on Preparing (for Attorneys):

1. Ask questions that establish that the witness is lying on important points (e.g., the witness first testifies to not being at the scene of the accident and soon after admits to being there)
2. Ask questions that show that the witness is prejudiced or biased (e.g., the witness testifies that he has hated the defendant since childhood)
3. questions that weaken the testimony of the witness by showing his opinion is questionable because of poor lighting (e.g., the witness with poor eyesight claims to have observed all the details of a fight that took place 500 feet away in a crowded bar)
4. Ask questions that show that an expert witness or even a lay witness who has testifies to an opinion is not competent or qualified due to lack of training or experience (e.g., a psychiatrist testifying to the defendant's need for dental work or a high school graduate testifying that in his opinion the defendant suffers from a chronic blood disease)
5. Ask questions that reflect on the witness' credibility by showing that he has given a contrary statement at another time.  (e.g., the witness testifies to the exact opposite of what he testifies to during the pre-trial hearing).  This may be done by asking the witness "did you make this statement on June 1st?" and then read it or show a signed statement to the witness to read part of it aloud or read it to the witness yourself and ask "did you say that?"
6. Be relaxed and ready to adapt your prepared questions to the testimony that is actually heard during the direct examination.
7. Always listen to the witness's answer.
8. Don't give the witness the opportunity to re-emphasize the strong points made during direct examination.
9. Don't quarrel with the witness.
10. Never try to allow the witness to explain anything.  Keep to the yes or no answers whenever possible.  Try to stop the witness if his answer or explanation is going on and hurting your case by saying "You may stop here, thank you", or "That's enough, thank you."
11. Don't harass or intimidate the witness by the questions you ask them.

Other Suggestions:

1. Anticipate each witness's testimony and write your questions accordingly.  Be ready to adapt your questions at trial depending on the actual testimony.
2. Never ask anything but a leading question (questions that suggest the answers and normally only require a yes or no answer).
3. Be brief.  Don't ask so many questions that well-made points are lost.
4. Prepare short questions using easily understood language.
5. Ask only questions to which you already know the answer.

Advice on Preparing (for Witness):

1. Learn the case thoroughly, especially your witness statement. 
2. Anticipate what you will be asked on cross-examination and prepare answers accordingly.  In other words, isolate all the possible weaknesses, inconsistencies, problems in your testimony and be prepared to explain them.
3. Be as relaxed and in control as possible.  An appearance of confidence and truthfulness is important.
4. Be sure that your testimony is never inconsistent with the facts set forth in the witness statement.
5. Don't read or recite your witness statement verbatim. 
6. Cross-examination can be tough, so don't get flustered.
7. Practice!  Practice!  Practice!

Re-direct examination
If the credibility or reputation for truthfulness of the witness has been attacked on cross-examination, the attorney whose witness has been damaged may wish to ask several more questions.  These questions should be limited to the damage the attorney thinks has been done and should be phrased so as to try to "save" the witness's truth-telling image in the eyes of the court.  Re-direct examination is limited to issues raised by the attorney on cross-examination.

Re-cross examination
Opposing counsel can ask the witness clarifying questions after re-direct but they must be in the scope of the re-direct and should avoid repetition.

Closing Statements           Prosecution/Plaintiff followed by Defense  
Objective:  To provide a clear and persuasive summary of: (1) the evidence you presented to prove the case and (2) the weaknesses of the other side's case.

A closing statement is a review of the evidence presented.  It should indicate how the evidence has satisfied the elements of the charge or claim, point out the law applicable to the case, and ask for a finding (verdict) of guilty (criminal case) or judgment for the plaintiff (civil case) or innocent (criminal case) or judgment for the defense (civil)

What should be included?

1. Thank the judge and jury for its time and attention.
2. Isolate the issues and describe briefly how your presentation resolved these issues.
3. Review the witness testimony.  Outline the strengths of your side's witnesses and also the weaknesses of the other side's witnesses.  (Remember to adapt your statement at the end of the trial to reflect what the witnesses actually said as opposed to the anticipated weaknesses of the other side)
4. Review the physical evidence.  Outline the strengths of your evidence and also outline the anticipated weakness of the other side's evidence.  (this section too must be adapted at trial)
5. State the applicable statues and any cases to show it supports your side.
6. Remind the judge or jury of the required burden of proof (the amount of evidence needed to prove a fact).  If you are the plaintiff's lawyer, you must tell and convince the Court that you have met that burden.  If you are the attorney for the defense, you must inform and convince the Court that the other side has failed to meet its burden.
7. Argue your case by stating how the law applies to the facts as you have proven them.
8. Don't forget to request the verdict/remedy you desire.

The Judge's Role and Decision (Verdict)

The Judge is the person who presides over the trial to ensure that the parties' are protected, and that the attorneys follow the rules of evidence and trial procedure.  In trials held without jury, the judge also has the function of determining the facts of the case and rendering a judgment.  Each round is scored by the presiding judge unless otherwise indicated at trial.

GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR TRIAL PROCEDURE

Presenting:

1. You must always be flexible.  Adjust your statement to the weaknesses, contradictions, etc., in the other side's case that actually come out at trial.  You can't anticipate everything perfectly before the actual presentation of the case.
2. Argue your side but don't appear to be vindictive.  Fairness is important.
3. Do not make objections during the other side's closing argument.
4. Do not read all the way through.
5. Keep eye contact with the judge, or at least look up occasionally.
6. Be sure your statement is well organized.
7. Rehearse as much as possible.

Some of the things most difficult for team members to learn to do are:

1. To decide which are the most important points to prove their side of the case and to make sure such proof takes place.
2. To tell clearly what they intend to prove in an opening statement and to argue effectively in their closing statement that the facts and evidence presented have proven their case.
3. To follow the formality of court, e.g., standing up when the judge enters; or when addressing the judge, to call the judge "Your Honor", etc.
4. To phrase questions on direct examination that are not leading (carefully review the rules of evidence and watch for this type of questioning in practice sessions).
5. Not to ask so many questions on cross-examination that well-made points are lost.  When a witness has been contradicted or otherwise discredited, student attorneys tend to ask additional questions which often lessen the impact of points previously made.  (Stop…recognize what questions are likely to require answers that will make good points for your side.  Rely on the use of these questions.  Avoid pointless questions!!!)
6. To think quickly on their feet when a witness gives an unexpected answer, an attorney asks unexpected questions, or a judge throws questions at the attorney or witness.  (Practice sessions will help prepare for this.)

GENERAL SUGGESTIONS FOR ALL PARTICIPANTS

1. Always be courteous to witnesses, other attorneys and the judge.
2. Always stand when talking in court and when the judge enters or leaves the room.
3. Dress appropriately (if it's a formal competition trial this may mean coat and tie for men and dresses or equivalent for females).
4. Always say "Yes, Your Honor" or "No, Your Honor" when answering a questions form the judge.
5. Those acting as attorneys shouldn't make objections while the other side is asking questions unless you are relatively sure that the judge will agree with your objection (judge's don’t like attorneys that constantly make objections or attorneys that make objections without being able to explain the reason for the objections).
6. If the judge rules against you on a point in the case, take the defeat gracefully and act cordially toward the judge and other side.

See “Tips for Participants” posted at www.alyig.org/judicial for more suggestions

ADDITIONAL RULES

1. The Hearsay Rule

Hearsay evidence is normally excluded from a trial because it is deemed untrustworthy.  "Hearsay" is a statement other than one made by the witness testifying at the trial, offered in evidence to prove that the matter asserted in the statement is true.  An example of hearsay is a witness testifying that he heard another person saying something about the facts in the case.  The reason that hearsay is untrustworthy is because the opposing side has no way of testing the credibility of the out of court statements that are allowed into evidence as exceptions to the rule prohibiting hearsay.

Statements that are not hearsay are: (1) prior statements made by the witness himself and (2) admissions made by a party opponent.

Some Examples of Hearsay are:

1. Present sense impression.  A statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the person making the statement was perceiving the event or condition made while the person making the statement was under the event or condition or immediately thereafter.
2. Excited utterance.  A statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the person making the statement was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition.
3. Medical statements.  Statements made for the purpose of medical diagnosis or treatment.
4. Recorded recollection.  A memorandum or record concerning a matter about which a witness once had knowledge but now has insufficient recollection to enable the witness to testify fully and accurately, shown to have been made or adopted by the witness when the matter was fresh in the witness's memory and to reflect that knowledge correctly.
5. Records of a regularly conducted activity.  Any type of data compiled in any form if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity and it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the data compilation.  Business activity includes any type of business, whether or not for profit, as well as the records compiled by public officers or agencies.
6. Learned treatises.  To the extent called to the attention of an expert witness upon cross-examination or relied upon by the expert witness in direct examination, statements contained in public treatises, periodicals or pamphlets on a subject of history, medicine, or other science or art, established as a reliable authority by the testimony or admission of the witness or other expert testimony, or by judicial notice.

See the Federal Rules of Evidence for more exceptions to hearsay.

2. Opinions of Witnesses

As a general rule, witnesses may not give opinions.  Certain witnesses who have special knowledge or qualifications may be qualified as "experts".  An expert must be qualified by the attorney for the party for which the expert is testifying; this means that before an expert can be asked an expert opinion, the questioning attorney must bring out the expert's qualifications and experience.

All witnesses may offer opinions based on common experience of laypersons in the community and of which the witnesses have first-hand knowledge.

Examples: 
"I think Taylor was clumsy."  (allowed)

            "I think Taylor was not qualified to be a nurse."
                   (not allowed unless made by nurse supervisor)

No witness may give an opinion about how the case should be decided.  This is called the "ultimate issue" question.

      Example: 
"Ms. Gray, would you say that Vince Taylor was made a victim of sex discrimination?" 

            Testimony by experts.

If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the judge or jury to understand the evidence or to determine a fact at issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training or education may testify thereto in the form of an opinion, and such testimony shall not be objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact.

3. Lack of Personal Knowledge:  A witness may not testify to any matter of which the witness has no personal knowledge.

Example:  If Nurse Gray never observed Mrs. Dillon speak to Mr. Taylor, she could not say, "Mrs. Dillon always spoke to Vince in a rude and abrupt manner."

4. Relevance of Evidence

Generally, only relevant testimony and evidence may be presented.  This means that the only physical evidence and testimony allowed is that which tends to make a fact which is important to the case more or less probable that the fact would be without the evidence.  Relevant evidence may, however, be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues or misleading the jury or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time or a needless presentation of cumulative evidence. 

Example: 
The defense asks, "Mr. Taylor, how did you like working in the pediatrics unit?"  This is irrelevant unless Taylor's satisfaction with that assignment somehow relates.

      If an objection is made to relevant evidence, the trial judge will base his decision upon a balancing of the probative value of the offered evidence against the danger of unfair prejudice.

5. Introduction of Physical Evidence

There is a special procedure for introducing physical evidence during a trial.  The physical evidence must be relevant to the case and the attorney must be prepared to defend its use on that basis.
 Lack of proper predicate.  Exhibits will not be admitted into evidence until they have been identified and shown to be authentic.  Even after proper predicate has been laid, the exhibits may still be objectionable due to relevance, hearsay, etc.
Below are the basic steps to use when introducing a physical object or document for identification and/or use as evidence.

1. Your Honor, may I approach the witness?
2. Mrs. Edwards, I'm going to show you what has been pre-marked as Exhibit 2.
3. Do you recognize this document?  (The witness should say yes and identify the document.)
4. If the attorney wishes to place the document into evidence, say, "Your honor, I offer this personnel file for admission into evidence as Plaintiff's exhibit 2, and ask the court to so admit it."
5. Get ruling form the court on admission and hand the document to the judge.
6. Objections
An attorney can object any time that the opposing attorneys have violated the rules of evidence.  The attorney wishing to object should stand up and do so at the time of the violation.  When an objection is made, the attorney who asked the question and that attorney usually will have a chance to explain why the objection should not be accepted ("sustained") by the judge.  The judge will then decide whether a question or answer must be discarded, because it has violated a rule of evidence ("objection sustained"), or whether to allow the question or answer to remain on the trial record ("objection overruled").

Following are standard objections:

1. Irrelevant evidence:  " Objection.  This testimony is irrelevant to the facts of this case."
2. Leading questions:  "Objection.  Counsel is leading the witness."  (Remember, this is only objectionable when done on direct examination.)
3. Improper character testimony: 
1. "Objection.  The witness's character or reputation has not been put in issue."
2. "Objection.  Only the witness's reputation/character for truthfulness is at issue here."
4. Beyond the scope of direct examination:  "Objection. Counsel is asking the witness about matters that did not come up in direct examination."
5. Hearsay:  "Objection.  Counsel's question/the witness's answer is based on hearsay."  (If the witness makes a hearsay statement, the attorney should also say, "and I ask that the statement be stricken from the record.")
6. Opinion:  "Objection.  Counsel is asking the witness to give an opinion."
7. Lack of personal knowledge:  "Objection.  The witness has no personal knowledge that would enable him to answer this question."
7. Miscellaneous Rules of Procedure
1. Re-direct and re-cross examinations are permissible; re-direct is limited to the scope of cross; re-cross is limited to the scope of the re-direct.
2. For mock trial purposes, motions for dismissal at the end of the plaintiffs' case are not to be used.
3. Order of closing arguments: first-plaintiff/prosecution; second-defense; rebuttal by plaintiffs if permitted.
4. For mock trial purposes, a motion for a directed verdict or dismissal of the case at the end of the plaintiff's case will not be permitted.  Neither shall a motion for a recess nor a motion to sequester witnesses be used during the competition.

GUIDELINES FOR JUDGES
Decisions Required
Judges are asked to decide the best team presentation.  While the decision on the legal merits of the case lends realism to the competition, teams will advance in the competition only on the basis of the decision determining the better presentation.  At the conclusion of the trial, the judges should take a short recess to consider these decisions.

1. With respect to the decision on the merits, the judge should consider only the evidence presented.  No other cases, statues, etc. may be referred to by counsel during the trial.
2. Scoring Sheets

   When deciding the best team's presentation, judges should consider the performance of all witnesses and attorneys for both sides.  During the trial, judge's evaluations of each performance should be carefully recorded in each blank on the score sheets provided for this purpose.

   There are no hard and fast criteria for judging the five areas of evaluation.  However, the following general guidelines may be helpful:

                     Opening Statement
   Did counsel generally confine statement to outlining the evidence to be presented?  Clearly and persuasively present his theory of the case?  Personalize self and client?

   Direct Examination
   Did counsel avoid use of leading questions?  Develop testimony in interesting and coherent fashion?  Follow up on witness' answer?  Present witness in most favorable light, emphasizing strengths and minimizing weaknesses?

   Cross-Examination
   Did counsel appropriately use leading questions?  Control witness?  Follow up on witness' answers?  Elicit helpful testimony?  Use impeachment opportunities?

   Evidence and Objections
   Did counsel ask questions that provoke a minimum of valid objections?  Make or fail to make objections of tactical or substantive merit?  Have good response to objections?  Show knowledge of Rules of Evidence?  Make appropriate use of evidence?

   Courtroom Demeanor
   Did counsel establish a rapport with witnesses?  Maintain a proper relationship with the court and other counsel?  Show an ability to respond to situations or developments in the case?

   Closing Argument
   Did counsel present an organized and cohesive statement of case?  Make effective treatment of opponents' strong arguments?  Speak persuasively?  Use facts to support his position?  Ask for a verdict for their side?
               Scoring Witnesses
   Each round of competition represents a team effort.  In this Mock Trial Tournament, the witnesses must also be effective in order for the team to win.

   Again, there are no hard and fast criteria for judging the five areas of evaluation.  However, the following general guidelines may be helpful:

               Facts
   Did the witness fully understand the facts provided by his/her statement?  Stay within the facts in cooperation with opposing side?

   Credible
   Did witness provide a believable characterization?  Was convincing during testimony?

   Decorum
   Was courtroom decorum observed?

   Presentation
   Did the witness speak clearly and distinctly?

   Poise
   Did the witness successfully rebut opposing attorney's attempt to confuse?  Maintain the dignity of the occasion?

Remember, the highest score must win.  Ties are not permissible.

Click Here for a Sample Scoring Sheet

Alabama YMCA Youth Judicial Competition
Rules of Evidence

Last update: September 17, 2008

Introduction

In American trials complex rules are used to govern the admission of proof (i.e., oral or physical evidence). These rules are designed to ensure that all parties receive a fair hearing and to exclude evidence deemed irrelevant, incompetent, untrustworthy, unduly prejudicial, or otherwise improper. If it appears that a rule of evidence is being violated, an attorney may raise an objection to the judge. The judge then decides whether the rule has been violated and whether the evidence must be excluded from the record of the trial. In the absence of a properly made objection, however, the evidence will probably be allowed by the judge. The burden is on the Youth Judicial team to know the Alabama YMCA Youth Judicial Rules of Evidence and to be able to use them to protect their client and fairly limit the actions of opposing counsel and their witnesses.

For purposes of Youth Judicial competition, the Rules of Evidence have been modified and simplified. They are based on the Federal Rules of Evidence, and its numbering system. Where rule numbers or letters are skipped, those rules were not deemed applicable to Youth Judicial procedure. Text in italics or underlined represent simplified or modified language.

Not all judges will interpret the Rules of Evidence (or procedure) the same way, and Youth Judicial attorneys should be prepared to point out specific rules (quoting, if necessary) and to argue persuasively for the interpretation and application of the rule they think appropriate.

The Youth Judicial Rules of Competition and these Alabama YMCA Youth Judicial Rules of Evidence govern the Alabama YMCA Youth Judicial Championship.

Article I.   General Provisions

Rule 101.   Scope
These Alabama YMCA Youth Judicial Rules of Evidence govern the trial proceedings of the Alabama YMCA Youth Judicial Competition.

Rule 102.   Purpose and Construction
These Rules are intended to secure fairness in administration of the trials, eliminate unjust delay, and promote the laws of evidence so that the truth may be ascertained.

Article II.   Judicial Notice

Not Applicable

Article III.   Presumptions in Civil Actions and Proceedings

Not applicable

Article IV.   Relevancy and its Limits

Rule 401.   Definition of "Relevant Evidence""
Relevant evidence" means evidence having any 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.

Rule 402.   Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible: Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible
Relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided in these Rules. Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.

Rule 403.   Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time
Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, if it confuses the issues, if it is misleading, or if it causes undue delay, wastes time, or is a needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

Rule 404.   Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes
(a) Character Evidence. Evidence of a person's character or character trait, is not admissible to prove action regarding a particular occasion, except:
(1) Character of accused. Evidence of a pertinent character trait offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut same;
(2) Character of victim. Evidence of a pertinent character trait of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor;
(3) Character of witness. Evidence of the character of a witness as provided in Rules 607, 608 and 609.
(b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove character of a person in order to show an action conforms to character. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.

Rule 405.   Methods of Proving Character
(a) Reputation or opinion. In all cases where evidence of character or a character trait is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination, questions may be asked regarding relevant, specific conduct.
(b) Specific instances of conduct. In cases where character or a character trait is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, proof may also be made of specific instances of that person's conduct.

Rule 406.   Habit; Routine PracticeEvidence of the habit of a person or the routine practice of an organization, whether corroborated or not and regardless of the presence of eyewitnesses, is relevant to prove that the conduct of the person or organization, on a particular occasion, was in conformity with the habit or routine practice.

Rule 407.   Subsequent Remedial MeasuresWhen measures are taken after an event which, if taken before, would have made the event less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct in connection with the event. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of subsequent measures when offered for another purpose; such as proving ownership, control, or feasibility of precautionary measures, if controverted, or impeachment.

Rule 408.   Compromise and Offers to CompromiseEvidence of (1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish, or (2) accepting or offering or promising to accept, a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim which was disputed as to either validity or amount, is not admissible to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim or its amount. Evidence of conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations is likewise not admissible. This rule does not require the exclusion of any evidence otherwise discoverable merely because it is presented in the course of compromise negotiations. This rule also does not require exclusion when the evidence is offered for another purpose, such as proving bias or prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct investigation or prosecution.

Rule 409.   Payment of Medical or Similar Expenses Evidence of furnishing or offering or promising to pay medical, hospital, or similar expenses occasioned by an injury is not admissible to prove liability for the injury.

Rule 410.   Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements.Except as otherwise provided in this Rule, evidence of the following is not, in any civil or criminal proceeding, admissible against a defendant who made the plea or was a participant in the plea discussions:
(1) a plea of guilty which was later withdrawn;
(2) a plea of nolo contendere;
(3) any statement made in the course of any proceeding under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or comparable state procedure regarding either of the forgoing pleas; or
(4) any statement made in the course of plea discussions made in the course of plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority which do not result in a plea of guilty or which result in a plea of guilty which is later withdrawn.

However, such a statement is admissible (i) in any proceeding wherein another statement made in the course of the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced and the statement ought, in fairness, be considered with it, or (ii) in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement if the statement was made by the defendant under oath, on the record and in the presence of counsel.

Rule 411.   Liability Insurance (civil case only) Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible upon the issue whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of insurance against liability when offered for another purpose, such as proof of agency, ownership, or control, or bias or prejudice of a witness.

Article V.   Privileges

Rule 501.   General Rule There are certain admissions and communications excluded from evidence on grounds of public policy. Among these are:

1. communications between husband and wife;
2. communications between attorney and client;
3. communications among grand jurors;
4. secrets of state; and
5. communications between psychiatrist and patient.

Article VI.   Witnesses

Rule 601.   General Rule of Competency Every person is competent to be a witness.

Rule 602.   Lack of Personal Knowledge A witness may not testify to a matter unless the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the witness' own testimony. This rule is subject to the provisions of Rule 703, related to opinion testimony by expert witnesses. (See Rule 2.2.)

Rule 607.   Who may Impeach The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling the witness.

Rule 608.   Evidence of Character and Conduct of Witness
(a) Opinion and reputation evidence of character. The credibility of a witness may be attacked or supported by evidence in the form of opinion or reputation, but subject to these limitations: (1) the evidence may refer only to character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, and (2) evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the character of the witness for truthfulness has been attacked by opinion or reputation evidence, or otherwise.
(b) Specific instances of conduct. Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting the witness' credibility, other than conviction of crime as provided in Rule 609, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence. They may, however, in the discretion of the Court, if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, be asked on cross-examination of the witness (1) concerning the witness' character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or (2) concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of another witness as to which character the witness being cross-examined has testified.
Testimony, whether by an accused or by any other witness, does not operate as a waiver of the accused's or the witness' privilege against self-incrimination with respect to matters related only to credibility.

Rule 609.   Impeachment by Evidence of Conviction of Crime
(this rule applies only to witnesses with prior convictions.)
(a) General Rule. For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that a witness other than the accused has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from the witness or established by public record during cross-examination, but only if the crime was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year, and the Court determines that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to the accused. Evidence that any witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if it involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the punishment.
(b) Time Limit. Evidence of a conviction under this Rule is not admissible if a period of more than ten years has elapsed since the date of the conviction or of the release of the witness from the confinement imposed for that conviction, whichever is the later date, unless the Court determines that the value of the conviction substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect. However, evidence of a conviction more than 10 years old as calculated herein, is not admissible unless the proponent gives to the adverse party sufficient advance written notice of intent to use such evidence to provide the adverse party with a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidencebr> (c) Effect of pardon, annulment, or certificate of rehabilitation. Evidence of a conviction is not admissible if (1) the conviction has been the subject of a pardon or other equivalent procedure based on a finding of the rehabilitation of the person convicted of a subsequent crime which was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year, or (2) the conviction has been the subject of a pardon, other equivalent procedure based on a finding of innocence.
(d) Juvenile adjudications. Evidence of juvenile adjudications is generally not admissible under this rule. The court may, however, in a criminal case allow evidence of a juvenile adjudication of a witness other than the accused if conviction of the offense would be admissible to attack the credibility of an adult and the court is satisfied that admission in evidence is necessary for a fair determination of the issue of guilt or innocence.
(e) Not applicable.

Rule 610.   Religious Beliefs or Opinions Evidence of the beliefs or opinions of a witness on matters of religion is not admissible for the purpose of showing that by reason of their nature the witness' credibility is impaired or enhanced.

Rule 611.   Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation
(a) Control by Court. The Court shall exercise reasonable control over questioning of witnesses and presenting evidence so as to:

1. make the questioning and presentation effective for ascertaining the truth,
2. to avoid needless use of time, and
3. protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.

(b) Scope of cross examination. The scope of cross examination shall not be limited to the scope of the direct examination, but may inquire into any relevant facts or matters contained in the witness' statement, including all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those facts and matters, and may inquire into any omissions from the witness statement that are otherwise material and admissible.
(c) Leading questions. Leading questions should not be used on direct examination of a witness (except as may be necessary to develop the witness' testimony). Ordinarily, leading questions are permitted on cross examination. When a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party, leading questions may be used.
(d) Redirect/Re-cross. After cross examination, additional questions may be asked by the direct examining attorney, but questions must be limited to matters raised by the attorney on cross examination. Likewise, additional questions may be asked by the cross examining attorney on re-cross, but such questions must be limited to matters raised on redirect examination and should avoid repetition.

Rule 612.   Writing Used to Refresh MemoryIf a written statement is used to refresh the memory of a witness either while or before testifying, the Court shall determine that the adverse party is entitled to have the writing produced for inspection. The adverse party may cross examine the witness on the material and introduce into evidence those portions which relate to the testimony of the witness.

Rule 613.   Prior Statements of WitnessesExamining witness concerning prior statement. In examining a witness concerning a prior statement made by the witness, whether written or not, the statement need not be shown nor its contents disclosed to the witness at that time, but on request the same shall be shown or disclosed to opposing counsel.

Extrinsic evidence of prior inconsistent statement of witness. Extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement by a witness is not admissible unless the witness is afforded an opportunity to explain or deny the same and the opposite party is afforded an opportunity to interrogate.

Article VII.   Opinions and Expert Testimony

Rule 701.   Opinion Testimony by Lay Witness If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness' testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness' testimony or the determination of a fact in issue.

Rule 702.   Testimony by Experts If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise.

Rule 703.   Bases of Opinion Testimony by ExpertsThe facts or data upon which an expert bases an opinion may be those perceived by or made known to the expert at or before the hearing. If of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the field in forming opinions or inferences, the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence.

Rule 704.   Opinion on Ultimate Issue
(a) opinion or inference testimony otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an issue to be decided by the trier of fact.

(b) In a criminal case, an expert witness shall not express an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused.

Rule 705.   Disclosure of Facts or Data Underlying Expert Opinion The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give reasons therefor without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data, unless the Court requires otherwise. The expert may in any event may be required to disclose the underlying facts or data on cross examination.

Article VIII.   Hearsay

Rule 801.   Definitions The following definitions apply under this article:
(a) Statement. A "statement" is an oral or written assertion or nonverbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by the person as an assertion.
(b) Declarant. A "declarant" is a person who makes a statement.
(c) Hearsay. "Hearsay" is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
(d) Statements which are not hearsay. A statement is not hearsay if:
(1) Prior statement by witness. The declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross examination concerning the statement and the statement is (A) inconsistent with the declarant's testimony, and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition, or (B) consistent with the declarant's testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive, or (C) one of identification of a person made after perceiving the person; or
(2) Admission by a party-opponent. The statement is offered against a party and is (A) the party's own statement in either an individual or a representative capacity or (B) a statement of which the party has manifested an adoption or belief in its truth, or (C) a statement by a person authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject, or (D) a statement by the party's agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship, or (E) a statement by a coconspirator of a party during the course in furtherance of the conspiracy.

Rule 802.   Hearsay RuleHearsay is not admissible, except as provided by these rules.

Rule 803.   Hearsay Exceptions, Availability of Declarant Immaterial The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule, even though the declarant is available as a witness:
(1) Present sense impression. A statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter.
(2) Excited utterance. A statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition.
(3) Then existing mental, emotional, or physical conditions. A statement of the declarant's then existing state of mind, emotion, sensation, or physical condition (such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain, and bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the execution, revocation, identification, or terms of declarant's will.
(4) Statements for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment. Statements made for the purpose of medical diagnosis or treatment.
(5) Recorded Recollection. A memorandum or record concerning a matter about which a witness once had knowledge but now has insufficient recollection to enable the witness to testify fully and accurately, shown to have been made or adopted by the witness when the matter was fresh in the witness' memory and to reflect that knowledge correctly.
(6) Records of regularly conducted activity. A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, unless the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. The term “business” as used in this paragraph includes business, institution, association, profession, occupation, and calling of every kind, whether or not conducted for profit.
(18) Learned treatises. To the extent called to the attention of an expert witness upon cross examination or relied upon by the expert witness in direct examination, statements contained in published treatises, periodicals, or pamphlets on a subject of history, medicine, or other science or art, established as a reliable authority by the testimony or admission of the witness or by other expert testimony or by judicial notice.
(21) Reputation as to character. Reputation of a person's character among associates or in the community.
(22) Judgment of previous conviction. Evidence of a judgment finding a person guilty of a crime punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year, to prove any fact essential to sustain the judgment, but not including, when offered by the Government in a criminal prosecution for purposes other than impeachment, judgments against persons other than the accused.
Rule 804.   Hearsay Exceptions, Declarant Unavailable
(a) Definition of unavailability. “Unavailability as a witness” includes situations in which the declarant -
(1) is exempted by ruling of the court on the ground of privilege from testifying concerning the subject matter of the declarant’s statement; or
(2) persists in refusing to testify concerning the subject matter of the declarant’s statement despite an order of the court to do so; or
(3) testifies to a lack of memory of the subject matter of the declarant’s statement; or
(4) is unable to be present or to testify at the hearing because of death or then existing physical or mental illness or infirmity; or
(5) is absent from the hearing and the proponent of a statement has been unable to procure the declarant’s attendance (or in the case of a hearsay exception under subdivision (b)(2), (3), or (4), the declarant’s atttendance or testimony) by process or other reasonable means.

A declarant is not unavailable as a witness if exemption, refusal, claim of lack of memory, inability, or absence is due to the procurement or wrongdoing of the proponent of a statement for the purpose of preventing the witness from attending or testifying.
(b) Hearsay exceptions. The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule if the declarant is unavailable as a witness:
(1) Former testimony.Testimony given as a witness at another hearing of the same or a different proceeding, or in a deposition taken in compliance with law in the course of the same or another proceeding, if the party against whom the testimony is now offered or, in a civil action or proceeding, a predecessor in interest, had an opportunity and similar motive to develop the testimony by direct, cross, or redirect examination.
(2) Statement under belief of impending death. In a prosecution for homicide or in a civil action or proceeding, a statement made by a declarant while believing that the declarant’s death was imminent, concerning the cause or circumstances of what the declarant believed to be impending death.
(3) Statement against interest. A statement which was at the time of its making so far contrary to the declarant’s pecuniary or proprietary interest, or so far tended to subject the declarant to civil or criminal liability, or to render invalid a claim by the declarant against another, that a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would not have made the statement unless believing it to be true. A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement.
(4) Statement of personal or family history. (A) A statement concerning the declarant’s own birth, adoption, marriage, divorce, legitimacy, relationship by blood, adoption, or marriage, ancestry, or other similar fact of personal or family history, even though declarant had no means of acquiring personal knowledge of the matter stated; (B) a statement concerning the foregoing matters, and death also, of another person, if the declarant was related to the other by blood, adoption, or marriage or was so intimately associated with the other’s family as to be likely to have accurate information concerning the matter declared.
(6) Forfeiture by wrongdoing. A statement offered against a party that has engaged or acquiesced in wrongdoing that was intended to, and did, procure the unavailability of the declarant as a witness.

Rule 805.   Hearsay within Hearsay
Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of the combined statement conforms with an exception to the hearsay rule provided in these rules.
The Host State has the obligation to review Hearsay Rules and make recommendations on omissions or additions to the Hearsay Instructions.

ARTICLE X.   Contents of Writing, Recordings and Photographs

Not applicable.

ARTICLE XI.   Other

Rule 1103.  Title.These rules may be known and cited as the Alabama YMCA Youth Judicial Federal Rules of Evidence.

The Judicial Director has the discretion to eliminate rules that do not pertain to the trial at hand.

1. Make sure to have a carefully prepared plan for trial--order of witnesses, written outlined of what your
witnesses will say. A planned examination is especially important when preparing for an expert witness. Remember to be flexible only after thorough preparation.
2. Lawyers make a mistake when they argue with or make argumentative remarks to opposing counsel. Don't argue with the other lawyer or make fun of him/her. Don't let the other lawyer provoke you into getting mad, this will inevitably hurt your client's case by irritating the Court and the jury.
3. Don't interrupt a witness. If the witness is nonresponsive, make an appropriate objection to the Court. Jurors always tend to identify with the witness. Badgering a witness will hurt your client's case. Never call a witness a "liar" or use other inflammatory language.
4. Don't interrupt the Court. If the judge starts ruling with you, stop talking. If he starts ruling against you, wait until he finishes before you attempt to "reason with him."
5. Don't thank the judge when he sustains an objection that you make.
6. Don't raise your voice either at the jury or at the Court. Avoid theatrics. Always try to call attention to the facts of your client's case and not to yourself. Ego trips hurt. A "low key approach" helps.
7. Don't make side remarks to the jury or "stage whispers" to co-counsel or clients. Avoid contact with jurors during recesses or on the way to and from Court. Lawyers make a mistake when they nod or "wink" at jurors. It makes the jurors self-conscious and uncomfortable.
8. Never misquote a case or misquote the law to a jury or exaggerate what a case says. Never mislead the judge with half the law. Never cite a case that has been expanded upon or distinguished or overruled.
9. Don't belabor cross-examination. Always have a well-planned and effective set of questions prepared, especially for experts.
10. Don't have an arrogant attitude with the Court or with opposing counsel.
11. Don't fail to have a planned opening and closing. Don't ramble. Don't engage in repetitious argument. A lot of cases are lost by lawyers talking too much and "turning off" jurors.
12. Avoid repeating what a witness answers in your next question.
13. Avoid starting questions with "OK" -- "all right" -- "I see."
14. Don't let the judge intimidate you. If you feel you are right, you have the right and the responsibility to object and to insist on your position. Do so in a professional manner, but protect your record.
15. Don't object to the Court not charging the jury on some point of law on which you have not requested a written change. Give the Court of Alabama Pattern Jury Instruction citation to support each charge, when applicable. Don't orally request the Judge to charge the jury on some point of law which you haven't given him some law to support your position or a requested written jury instruction.
16. Don't show the jury and exhibit or let one get before the jury that has not been admitted into evidence.
17. Don't "cheap shot," that is avoid putting inadmissible material in a question and avoid going into something that has previously been excluded by the Court on a Motion in Limine.
18. Don't give the Judge requested jury charges just as he completes his oral charge.
19. Always be professional -- act like a lawyer. Try to help the Court. The Judge will see this and will appreciate it. Jurors also get a favorable impression from a display of professionalism.
20. Don't tell the Judge what the law is and then fail to have a case or a citation of authority with which to back up your statement.
21. Judges can see that jurors appreciate a hard working, enthusiastic, and positive approach to a case. If you are too relaxed, nonchalant, unenthusiastic and have a "don't care attitude," the jury will read this and their attitude may be governed thereby.
22. Lawyers make a mistake when they become emotionally involved in a case.
23. Don't turn your back on the jury when questioning a witness, they will lose interest and may miss some important point you are trying to make.

1. When court is in session, counsel should address the court and should not address opposing counsel directly on any matter related to the case.
2. Examination of witnesses' (position).
   Attorneys should examine the witnesses from the counsel table, lectern or wherever reasonably directed by the court, except in the presentation of exhibits or demonstrations.
3. Counsel should not at anytime in the courtroom:
   1. Sit on the jury rail
   2. Sit on the counsel table
   3. In bench trials counsel should not sit in the jury box when examining a witness
   4. Counsel should not hang or lean on the judge's bench at any time
   5. Counsel should not rattle pocket change during the course of a trial
   6. Counsel should not wander around the courtroom during the course of a trial
   7. Counsel should refrain from clipping his/her fingernails during the course of the trial.
4. Method of Examination of Witnesses: Witnesses should be treated with fairness and consideration. They should not be crowded nor shouted at; they should not be ridiculed, humiliated nor otherwise abused. The untruthful or hostile witness can be examined firmly and extensively without abuse.
>Addressing the Court: Counsel should stand to make objections or in addressing other matters. Argument for objection, and a response by opposing counsel, should be made only after permission to do so is given, or if argument is requested by the court. Ruling once made must be obeyed.