California Evidence Code: Admin Law Proceeding Applicability

The California Evidence Code, enacted on May 18, 1965, sets out the rules for criminal cases, including the types of evidence that may be introduced at trial, witness testimony, and hearsay evidence rules. However, it is important to note that the Evidence Code does not apply to administrative law proceedings or any legislative or arbitral proceedings. Instead, administrative adjudication hearings are governed by a separate set of rules outlined in the California Government Code, which allows for more flexibility in the types of evidence presented.

The California Evidence Code does not apply to admin law proceedings

The California Evidence Code, enacted by the California State Legislature on May 18, 1965, codifies the formerly mostly common-law law of evidence. While Section 351 of the Code effectively abolishes any remnants of the law of evidence not explicitly included in it, the Evidence Code only applies to judicial proceedings in the California state courts. This means that the California Evidence Code does not apply to any legislative, administrative, or arbitral proceedings.

Therefore, the California Evidence Code does not apply to admin law proceedings. This is because administrative proceedings are not judicial proceedings, and so the rules of evidence that apply in court do not apply in the same way.

It is worth noting that Division 8 of the California Evidence Code is an exception to this rule, as it applies to all proceedings.

The code only applies to judicial proceedings in California state courts

The California Evidence Code was enacted by the California State Legislature on May 18, 1965, to codify the formerly mostly common-law law of evidence. While Section 351 of the Code effectively abolished any remnants of the law of evidence not explicitly included in it, the Code only applies to judicial proceedings in California state courts. It does not apply to any legislative, administrative, or arbitral proceedings.

The Evidence Code is a California code that governs the rules of evidence in criminal cases. These rules control what is said and shown in a jury trial, a bench trial, a preliminary hearing, a motion to suppress, and every other hearing that takes place in open court. The rules of evidence are carefully written to lead to reliable and trustworthy verdicts in criminal jury trials.

The Evidence Code determines what evidence is admissible. "Admissible" evidence is evidence that can be considered by the judge or the jury to decide the facts of the case. All admissible evidence must first be relevant. Relevant evidence has some tendency to prove or disprove a fact that is important to the outcome of the case.

Once evidence is admissible, the rules of evidence require that the evidence not be unduly prejudicial. That means that evidence, even if reliable and relevant, should be kept out of court if it is confusing and misleading. This also allows the judge to limit evidence that is cumulative, such as evidence that would be repetitive and take up a great deal of court time.

Admin law proceedings are heard by administrative law judges

In California, all hearings of state agencies required to be conducted under this chapter shall be conducted by administrative law judges on the staff of the Office of Administrative Hearings. The Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings has the power to appoint a staff of administrative law judges for the office. Each administrative law judge shall have been admitted to practice law in this state for at least five years immediately preceding their appointment and shall possess any additional qualifications established by the State Personnel Board for the particular class of position involved.

The Evidence Code determines what evidence is admissible. "Admissible" evidence is evidence that can be considered by the judge or the jury to decide the facts of the case. All admissible evidence must first be relevant. Relevant evidence has some tendency to prove or disprove a fact that is important to the outcome of the case. Once evidence is admissible, the rules of evidence require that the evidence not be unduly prejudicial. That means that evidence, even if reliable and relevant, should be kept out of court if it is confusing and misleading.

A large portion of evidence comes into court through witnesses that answer questions, and their statements create the facts that are used to decide the case. The court has the power to order witnesses into court and can deliver punishments for witnesses that do not show up. A person may claim a privilege, which allows them to refuse to testify. Some common privileges are attorney-client, marital, and doctor/psychotherapist-client. Privilege means that one of these individuals cannot be forced to testify against the other in a criminal trial.

Admin law proceedings are initiated by filing an accusation or a statement of issues

Administrative law proceedings in California are initiated by filing an accusation or a statement of issues. The California Evidence Code, enacted in 1965, codifies the formerly mostly common-law law of evidence. However, it is important to note that the Evidence Code does not apply to administrative proceedings.

An accusation is a written statement of charges that sets forth the acts or omissions with which the respondent is charged. It should be written in ordinary and concise language, enabling the respondent to prepare a defence. The accusation must specify the statutes and rules that the respondent is alleged to have violated but should not merely consist of charges phrased in the language of these statutes and rules. The accusation is typically verified, although verification may be on information and belief.

On the other hand, a statement of issues is a written statement specifying the statutes and rules with which the respondent must show compliance by producing proof at the hearing. It should also include any particular matters that have come to the initiating party's attention that would authorise a denial of the agency action sought. Like accusations, statements of issues are usually verified, and verification may be on information and belief.

Once an accusation or statement of issues has been filed, the agency must serve a copy on the respondent. The respondent then has 15 days to file a notice of defence, in which they may request a hearing, object to the accusation, or admit the accusation in whole or in part. If the respondent fails to file a notice of defence, they are deemed to have waived their right to a hearing, although the agency may still grant a hearing at its discretion.

In summary, admin law proceedings in California are initiated by filing an accusation or a statement of issues, which are both written statements that outline the nature of the charges and the relevant statutes and rules. The respondent then has the opportunity to respond and request a hearing within 15 days.

Admin law proceedings are subject to different rules of evidence

The California Evidence Code was enacted by the California State Legislature on May 18, 1965, to codify the formerly mostly common-law law of evidence. However, except for division 8, the Evidence Code only applies to judicial proceedings in the California state courts and does not apply to any legislative, administrative, or arbitral proceedings.

In administrative proceedings, the hearing need not be conducted according to technical rules relating to evidence and witnesses. Instead, any relevant evidence shall be admitted if it is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, regardless of the existence of any common law or statutory rule that might make improper the admission of the evidence over objection in civil actions.

Hearsay evidence may be used to supplement or explain other evidence, but over timely objection, it shall not be sufficient in itself to support a finding unless it would be admissible over objection in civil actions. The rules of privilege shall be effective to the extent that they are otherwise required by statute to be recognized at the hearing. The presiding officer has the discretion to exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will necessitate undue consumption of time.

Frequently asked questions