CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Foundation Issues
......Facts to be Redetermined by Jury
.........General Rule
13 Cards On This Topic:

Questions of relevancy, personal knowledge, authentication or identity of hearsay declarant, are inadmissible unless proponent has met burden.

Court may conditionally admit proffered evidence, subject to subsequent proof of preliminary fact.

Upon request, court shall instruct jury to determine whether preliminary fact exists and to disregard proffered evidence unless it does.

If proffered evidence admitted conditionally and court subsequently determines it should not have been admitted, then court shall instruct jury to disregard it.

D has constitutional right to have jury determine materiality of false statements made to HUD.

D's requested instruction, that witness was an accomplice, was properly denied as question whether witness was an accomplice was an issue for the jury.

Court's authority to allow a witness to answer on a provisional basis, subject to a motion to strike, is recognized in EC 403, as well as in other contexts.

Trial ct. had no duty to conduct EC 402 hearing sua sponte and no limiting instruction required—issues regarding witness's credibility are properly left to the jury, and not a proper subject of an EC 402 hearing.

Jury may reasonably have inferred D made hang-up calls to V's residence night before murder, having stolen her wallet with unlisted number the day before.

Trial court did not err in not finding Ws accomplices as matter of law where it was a question for the jury.

If evidence of preliminary fact sufficient to sustain finding either way, court should admit evidence and let jury decide question.

Evidence admissible if sufficient for reasonable trier of fact to find preliminary fact exists; lesser burden of proof than preponderance of evidence.

Sole duty of trial court is to decide whether sufficient basis exists to admit evidence and let jury determine value.