Você está na página 1de 2

List of Common Objections:

1. Relevance:
a. The evidence is not directly material to an issue in the case.
b. Example: in a criminal case, something is not relevant if it does not tend to
prove/disprove the defendant’s guilt.

2. Lack of Personal Knowledge:


a. The witness lacks the ability to answer the question because they do not have direct
knowledge of the answer.
b. Example: asking Witness A about a fact contained in Witness B’s statement, and that same
fact is nowhere to be found in Witness A’s statement.

3. Narrative:
a. The question will allow the witness to ramble on and on about extraneous
facts/information
b. Example: asking a witness, “What did you do on January 1st?” This type of question is not
focused enough, and the answer could encompass an entire day’s worth of irrelevant
events.

4. Hearsay:
a. The question/answer elicits the statements of someone else (not the witness), spoken
out of court, and offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
b. Example: In the trial of Defendant X running a red light, witness John Doe testifies that
Jane Smith told him that she saw Defendant run the red light. Jane Smith’s statement about
seeing the defendant run the red light is hearsay.
c. Caveat: there are many exceptions to the hearsay rule. The most important, and easiest to
remember, is that the prosecution can always introduce evidence of the defendant’s
statements in a criminal trial over a hearsay objection. Your attorney-coach will help you
with other potential exceptions to the hearsay rule.

5. Leading:
a. The form of the question suggests the answer.
b. For examples, refer back to the section dealing with cross examination. Trial Court
Handbook Page 13

6. Asked and Answered:


a. The question has already been asked by the attorney, and answered by the witness.
Asking the same question multiple times will elicit this objection.

7. Beyond Scope:
a. Going beyond the subject matter covered on direct or cross examination. b. Example: On
direct examination, the scope of questions dealt with what someone did on January 1st. On
cross examination, questions about something that occurred on January 5th would be
beyond the scope of direct examination.

8. Assumes Facts Not in Evidence:


a. A fact not testified to previously is contained in the form of the question.
b. Example: Upon questioning, Goldilocks testifies that she went into the three bears’ house,
and took a nap in baby bear’s bed. The attorney then asked, “What was it that you didn’t like
about papa bear’s bed when you tried it out?” This last question assumes a fact not yet in
evidence – specifically, that Goldilocks tried out papa bear’s bed first.

9. Vague:
a. The question is not specific or focused enough
b. Example: asking a witness what they did “yesterday.”

10. Speculation:
a. The question requires the witness who lacks personal knowledge to guess about the
answer.
b. Example: asking Witness A what Witness B was thinking.

11. Compound:
a. More than one question contained in the question posed by an attorney b. Example: “Do
you like peas and carrots?”

12. Argumentative:
a. Counsel summarizes facts, draws own conclusion, and demands that the witness agree.
b. Counsel’s question is really argument in the guise of a question. c. Excessive quibbling
with the witness by the attorney.

13. Cumulative:
a. Repeated presentation of the same evidence by exhibits or witnesses to the point where it
is unfair and wastes time. b. Example: Calling six witnesses to testify to the same thing 1

14. Non-responsive: a. Witness won’t answer, or the answer they do give does not answer
the question posed.
b. Example: Attorney asks witness what color the car was that ran the stop sign, and the
witness testifies that a woman was driving the car.

Você também pode gostar