What Happens When Competency in Evidence?

Competency in evidence refers to the legal standards that determine whether a piece of evidence can be legally admissible in court. If evidence is found incompetent, it is excluded from the trial proceedings.

Competency in evidence is paramount in ensuring that only reliable and relevant evidence is presented at trial. The rules regarding competency vary by jurisdiction but generally stem from common law principles and statutory enactments. Typically, these rules assess the ability of a witness to provide testimony, the admissibility of documents, and other forms of evidence based on set criteria such as relevance, reliability, and the ability to aid in determining the facts in issue.

For witness testimony, competency is generally established by the witness's ability to understand the obligation to tell the truth, their capability to perceive the event they are testifying about, and the ability to recall the details of that event. For instance, a minor may be deemed competent based on the ability to comprehend their duty to speak truthfully, as seen in cases like "State v. Hightower (2013)" where the court upheld a minor’s competency to testify after a thorough assessment.

In terms of documentary evidence, rules surrounding competency often focus on authenticity and relevance. Documents must be shown to be what they purport to be; otherwise, they may be ruled incompetent under the hearsay rule if they are presented to prove the truth of the matter asserted without an exception applying. Traditional bar exams often test on the ability to identify which evidence is competent vs. incompetent in a given fact pattern.

If evidence is determined to be incompetent, it is inadmissible, meaning it cannot be considered by the jury or judge in their decision-making process. Legal teams will often raise objections based on incompetency during the introduction of evidence in trials. The determination of competency is ultimately a matter for the judge who will make a ruling after hearing arguments from both sides regarding the admissibility of the evidence.

• 1State v. Hightower (2013) - Established criteria for minor witness competency.
• 2Frye v. United States (1923) - Introduced the 'Frye standard' for scientific evidence admissibility.
• 3Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993) - Refined standards for expert testimony admissibility.
• 4People v. McIntosh (2008) - Considered factors for witness credibility affecting competency.
• 5Commonwealth v. Pytlak (2010) - Examined documentary evidence authenticity in relation to competency.

• how-is-evidence-testimonial-competency-determined
• what-are-the-rules-of-relevance-in-evidence
• when-is-expert-testimony-competent