Evidence before Crim Pro? Forum

[txig]

I'm signing up for summer courses and one of my friends mentioned that it'd be wise to take evidence before/concurrent with criminal procedure. I was just wondering if that is necessary, or even helpful?

Appreciate any advice! Thanks.

[kalvano]

Not necessary at all. Crim Pro is more a con law class.

[Tanicius]

Not necessary at all. Crim Pro is more a con law class.

Yup. Evidence is basically 95% statutory with one very narrow constitutional issue that considers a few Supreme Court cases. CrimPro on the other hand is 100% case law. In real life there's a lot of overlap, but in a law school class there is no overlap whatsoever.

[kalvano]

Also, Crim Pro is a fun class if you have a good prof.

[samcro_op]

I agree with all of this. The only time evidence has been relevant in any class has been Civ Pro.

[encore1101]

the only evidence knowledge you'd need to know for crimpro is:

evidence that is unconstitutionally obtained will generally not be admissible = exclusionary rule.
there are exceptions to the exclusionary rule.

you won't even go over the exclusionary rule in a formal evidence course, so its wholly not necessary.