What are the differences between Federal rules of evidence and California state rules of evidence?

Answer 1

there are numerous differences between FRE and CEC. This list is not exclusive, and thus further research may be needed in order to have the full spectrum of the legal differences: Personal Knowledge of a witness is a preliminary fact question for the judge to determine under FRE. HOWEVER, under CEC, personal knowledge of a witness is a conditional relevancy question to be determined by the trier of fact. Relevance under CEC relates to fact in dispute; whereas relevance under FRE refers to evidence having any tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. Expert testimony - new technique - is admissible under CEC if it is generally accepted in the community. under FRE, it is admissible if the judge decides that it is reliable.

Answer 2

Here's a link to a chart. Helped me on the Cal Bar Exam. Good luck.

http://www.wsulaw.edu/upload/255a_molko_Fleming_EVIDENCE_FED_STATE_DIFFERENCES_CHART_RULES_3.doc. Here, also, is California and Federal Rules of Evidence compared and

contrasted with Court TV's Vincent DiCarlo. Findlaw link is below.

"We can only cover both the federal and California law of evidence in

a brief essay like this by a ruthless process of selection and

compression. What we will cover can best be thought of as that

essential kernel of the law of evidence that the trial lawyer must

carry in his head. . . . "

http://library.findlaw.com/2001/Jan/1/241488.html