§ 9.02 CONSEQUENTIAL ("MATERIAL") FACTS DEFINED

• Jurisdiction: United States

§ 9.02. CONSEQUENTIAL ("MATERIAL") FACTS DEFINED

Rule 401 embraces two concepts: relevancy and materiality.⁷ To be admissible, evidence must be both relevant and material. However, instead of the term "material fact," Rule 401 uses the phrase "fact of consequence to determining the action,"⁸ which can be shortened to consequential fact.

"Relevancy" describes the relationship between an item of evidence and the proposition it is offered to prove. In contrast, "materiality" describes the relationship between that proposition and the issues in the case — i.e., the consequential or material facts.

Substantive law. With the exception of the credibility of witnesses,⁹ the "consequential facts" in a particular case are a matter of substantive law — (1) the elements of a charged crime, (2) the elements of a cause of action, (3) the elements of an affirmative defense, and (4) damages in civil cases.¹⁰ The pleadings may remove some of these elements; for example, if the complaint alleges negligence and the answer does not deny negligence but asserts contributory negligence as a defense, negligence is off-the-table; it is no longer an issue in the case.¹¹

Example. Is evidence of voluntary intoxication "material" under Rule 401 in a first-degree murder prosecution? Second-degree murder? Under the substantive criminal law, voluntary intoxication is typically material to first degree murder because, if believed by the jury, it could negate premeditation (an element) and thus reduce the offense to second-degree murder. In contrast, it is immaterial in a second degree murder prosecution because, under the substantive law, premeditation is not an element of that particular crime. The results of a blood-alcohol test could be offered as evidence of intoxication. (See figure 9-1).

FIGURE 9-1

Example. In a rape prosecution, assume the accused proffers evidence tending to show that the alleged victim consented. Because "lack of consent" is an element of common law rape,¹² the evidence relates to a consequential (material) fact. In contrast, the same evidence would not be material in a statutory rape prosecution because lack of consent is not an element of statutory rape.¹³

Example. Suppose in raising an insanity defense, the accused proffers psychiatric testimony concerning her inability to control her conduct (volitional component) due to a mental disease. In some jurisdictions, the definition of insanity contains a volitional component,¹⁴ and thus this evidence would be...