Also known as:federal rules of evidence · FRE · Federal Rules of Evidence
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A comprehensive set of procedural rules that govern the admissibility of evidence in federal civil and criminal proceedings. The rules determine whether particular items of proof may be presented to the factfinder and under what conditions.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Deposition Used for Impeachment
Fiona Foster testified at trial that she had never discussed the contract terms with the defendant. Frontier Capital offered the transcript of her earlier deposition in which she admitted having those discussions. The court permitted the deposition excerpt to be read to the jury to contradict her testimony.
Prior Act Evidence on Intent
Farah Fox was charged with fraud. The government offered evidence that she had previously submitted false invoices to another client. The court admitted the evidence after finding sufficient proof from which the jury could conclude she committed the prior act and that its probative value on intent was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Statutes
Federal Rules
Casebooks
Hornbooks
Course Outlines
Study Supplements
Deposition Admitted as Substantive Evidence
Fatou Fall sued Fidelity Trust after a disputed transaction. At trial she offered the deposition of a former trust officer who had left the country. The court allowed the deposition because the officer's testimony would have been admissible if he had appeared live and the procedural prerequisites were satisfied.
Bias Impeachment Through Affiliation
Freya Freeman testified for the plaintiff. On cross-examination the defendant asked whether she belonged to an organization whose rules encouraged members to protect one another by any means. The court permitted the questions because evidence of bias is always relevant to credibility.
Remote Testimony by Video
Faye Fuller, a key eyewitness, had moved overseas and could not travel. The court allowed her to testify by live video link after finding good cause and appropriate safeguards, satisfying the requirement that testimony ordinarily be taken in open court.
Waiver of Plea Statement Protections
Fatima Flores entered plea negotiations and later proceeded to trial. She had agreed that statements made during those negotiations could be used to impeach her if she testified inconsistently. The court enforced the agreement and permitted limited use of the statements for impeachment.
United States v. Mezzanatto513 U.S. 196 (1995)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
When may a deposition be used at trial under the Federal Rules of Evidence?+
A deposition may be used to contradict or impeach the deponent's testimony or for any other purpose permitted by the Federal Rules of Evidence, provided the deponent was present or represented at the deposition.
What standard applies to admission of uncharged misconduct under Rule 404(b)?+
The evidence is admissible if there is sufficient proof from which the jury could find the defendant committed the prior act and if the probative value on a non-propensity issue is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice under Rule 403.
Is evidence of bias always admissible to impeach a witness?+
Yes. Evidence showing bias, including membership in an organization whose tenets encourage false testimony on behalf of fellow members, is always relevant and admissible.
509 U.S. 579, 592 (1993)Evidence
…misleading because of the difficulty in evaluating it.' " Id. at ----, 113 S.Ct. at 2798 (quoting Weinstein, Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence Is Sound; It Should Not Be Amended, 138 F.R.D. 631, 632 (1991)). Federal judges must therefore exclude proffered scientific evidence under Rules 702 and 403 unless they are convinced that…