Also known as: routine practices · habit or routine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Evidence describing an organization's customary sequence of actions performed in response to a repeated situation. The evidence may be admitted to prove that the organization followed the same sequence on a particular occasion. Admission does not require corroboration or an eyewitness to the specific occasion.
Robert Rivera checked into White Suites and later discovered his laptop missing from the room. He sued the hotel, alleging the front desk clerk failed to reprogram the key after the prior guest departed. White Suites offered coworker testimony that the clerk always re-coded keys immediately upon checkout while printing the invoice. The court admitted the testimony to show the clerk followed the same steps when Rivera checked in.
Rachel Ramirez sued Gate Media after a stage light fell and injured her at its venue. Gate Media offered its stage manager's testimony that she always performed a pre-show checklist thirty minutes before doors opened by tugging each fixture and marking a laminated form. The court admitted the testimony to prove the lights received the required inspection on the night of the accident.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Ryan Roberts, a passenger injured in a bus collision at an unlit intersection, sued Blue Dispatch and its driver. Blue Dispatch offered coworker testimony that the driver always came to a complete stop and counted to three at that crossing every night after a prior near-miss. The court admitted the testimony to show the driver followed the same practice on the night of the collision.
Routine practice evidence describes a specific, repeated sequence of actions in response to a particular situation. Character evidence concerns a general propensity or trait. Rule 406 permits the former to prove conduct on a given occasion while generally barring the latter under Rule 404.
Supporting sources
No. The rule expressly states that evidence of routine practice may be admitted regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness to the specific occasion.
Supporting sources
The conduct must be a regular response to a repeated specific situation and sufficiently unreflective or semi-automatic. Occasional deviations under stress or changed conditions can undermine the inference that the practice was followed on the occasion in question.
Supporting sources
…testimony, our application of those Clauses to the context of custodial police interrogation is relatively recent because the routine practice of such interrogation is itself a relatively new development. See, e. g., Miranda , 384 U. S., at 445-458. [^maj-2]: See also Davis v. United States , 512 U. S. 452, 457-458 (1994);…