The Kentucky Rules of Evidence: A Primer
By Andrew DeSimone and Josh Owen
Most of us remember evidence from our second year of law school. This was the course that brought “law” home to many of us and where courses like contracts, torts, and criminal law began to come into perspective. Evidence taught us how to prove damages in an assault case or how to prove a criminal defendant committed burglary.
In many ways, this article is an homage to Professor Robert G. Lawson at the University of Kentucky, who authored The Kentucky Evidence Law Handbook for almost 50 years. See Robert G. Lawson, The Kentucky Evidence Law Handbook (LexisNexis Matthew Bender eds., 2022 ed.). Professor Lawson has retired, but his handbook remains the premier discussion of the rules of evidence in Kentucky. If there is one bound book to take to trial, it is The Kentucky Evidence Law Handbook. Almost every trial and appellate judge will recognize it as authoritative on the Kentucky Rules of Evidence.
Bottom Line:
“If there is one bound book to take to trial, it is The Kentucky Evidence Law Handbook. Almost every trial and appellate judge will recognize it as authoritative on the Kentucky Rules of Evidence.”
This primer is in no way intended to be a substitute to Professor Lawson’s seminal work. Instead, the primer is designed to better understand the rules of evidence and how the rules work together. This is helpful for formulating motions in limine prior to trial and for making objections in the “heat of battle.”
Essentially, the rules of evidence can be best understood as follows: All evidence is admissible unless an exception applies to prevent the introduction of that evidence. The major exceptions on the admissibility of evidence are (1) undue prejudice (or confusion of issues, etc.); (2) character evidence; (3) privileged evidence; (4) opinion evidence; (5) hearsay; and (6) the requirement of authentication. See KRE 403-04, 406, 408-409, 501, 701, 801A, 803, 804, 804A, and 901.
What makes the practice of law challenging, particularly the rules of evidence, is that exceptions to the exceptions exist. Therefore, in law school, we struggled through the hearsay exceptions and the exceptions on the use of character evidence. However, these exceptions are best understood as reverting evidence back to its original state: admissible.
Read the full article here. This article is intended as a summary of state and/or federal law and does not constitute legal advice. This article was originally published by Kentucky Defense Counsel in Common Defense magazine.
