6) Hearsay Flashcards
policy: why is hearsay out?
no opportunity to cross examine –> need to be able to challenge D’s perception, memory, sincerity, ability to relate
hearsay: def 801
out of court st, [other than one made by the declarant while testifying at trial], offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted
declarant: def
the person making the st (mouthpiece)
st: def 801(a)
either:
1) oral or written assertion intending communication, or
2) assertive conduct (nonverbal, but intended as an assertion)
out of court declarant comes to court to testify
doesn’t matter –> problem is we had no way to test those words/etc at the time of utterance
assertive conduct: def
conduct intended to communicate as a substitute for words
assertive conduct: yes exs
pointing
nod/shake head
sketch of criminal
non-assertive conduct: exs
demeanor
limp/gait
HOW it was said (slurred speech)
animals + machines
NOT statements!
ojo w parrot: not a statement so can’t be hearsay but inadmissible bc irrelevant
evidence not hearsay bc not offered for its truth: kinds
1) effect on listener
2) verbal acts
effect on listener: kinds
notice of dangerous conditions
motive / self defense
verbal acts: def
words themselves have independent legal significance. (truth of st is irrelevant – what we’re proving is just that words were uttered)
verbal acts: exs
1) transactional words (k, deed, will)
2) actual words of defamation
hearsay exemptions under 801(d): use
YES admissible for truth
hearsay exemptions under 801(d): list
1) statement by party opponent
2) prior sts (subtypes)
statement by party opponent: kinds
1) direct st by party
2) adoptive admission (conduct or silence)
3) authorized admission
4) vicarious admission
5) admission by co-conspirator
exemption: party opponent: direct st by party:
st by a party, offered against him by his opponent. Can be fact or opinion, no personal knowledge needed, dnn to be against interest when made
exemption: party opponent: admission by silence
requires that RP would have denied the st (cheating on wife)
no admissions by silence post Miranda
exemption: party opponent: adoptive admission
need sufficient evidence to show that party heard, understood, and adopted it as her own
exemption: party opponent: authorized admission
st by party’s agent or representative
exemption: party opponent: employee admission, aka
vicarious admission
exemption: party opponent: def
st of party’s ee offered against party (who is ER)
must be mad eduring existence of ee/er rship
concerning a matter w/in the scope of employment
exemption: party opponent: co-conspirator’s sts
sts of co-conspirators can be used against all other co-conspirators (reqs)
ok no charge for conspiracy (but must prove existence of conspiracy to court)
ok not aware conspiracy exists
exemption: party opponent: co-conspirators sts: reqs
(preponderance to judge)
1) there was a conspiracy
2) declarant was member of conspiracy
3) st was made in furtherance of conspiracy (moved the crim combination forward)
4) st was made during existence of conspiracy (not after)
exemption: prior statements; reqs common to all (+ result)
1) declarant must testify at trial
2) declarant must be available + subject to cross-exam re the st
(result: no confrontaiton clause problems)
exemption: prior statements; kinds
1) prior inconsistent
2) prior consistent
3) prior identification
exemption: prior statements; prior inconsistent: def
prior inconsistent st can be offered for truth if:
1) sworn
exemption: prior statements; prior inconsistent: contrast 613 vs 801
[contrast 613 PINS: not sworn, but only ok for limited purpose of impeachment
801: yes sworn + for truth
exemption: prior statements; prior inconsistent: “sworn” def
GJ: yes
prelim hg: yes
NOT notarized affidavit
exemption: prior statements; prior consistent 801(d)(1)(B): when
1) to rehabilitate wit AFTER an inference of recent fabrication has been made [st must predate the motive to lie], or
2) to rehabilitate declarant’s credibility as a wit when attacked on another ground
exemption: prior statements; prior ID 801(d)(1)(C): def
prior st of identificaiton of a person made after perceiving him can be admissible. (policy–courtroom IDs not as good)
hearsay rule: 802
hearsay is inadmissible except as provided by FRE (excpetions) or other laws
hearsay exceptions 803: generalc ategories
1) truth producing (present sense impression, excited utterance, mental/phys condition, med tx)
2) records (business, public, ancient docs)
3) learned treatise
4) reputation
5) judges
803 exceptions: present sense impression: def 803(1)
st made by declarant (oral or written)
1) describing or explaining effect or condition
2) made while or immediately after perceiving it (close in time)
IMMEDIATE
803 exceptions: present sense impression: NOT required
declarant dnn be known or avail
dnn be excited utterance
803 exceptions: excited utterance: 803(2): def
st related to a startlign event
2) made while declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition
does NOT need to be immediate