HEARSAY

Question 1

When an out of ct statement is not HSY - 2 instances

Answer 1

1. When it not offered to prove the facts asserted
2. When the statement is not an assertion

Question 2

7 Non-HSY utterances CORRECT IT break it down as examples of NonHSY verbal.acts

Answer 2

1. Verbal acts constituting
   a slander or
   deceit
   for which damages are sought.

false statements by telemarketers in a fraud prosecution, which were verbal acts, were not offered for the truth but indeed were offered because they were false and accordingly were not hearsay);

statements made by members of transnational romantic scam to their deluded targets were the operative words of the criminal action and therefore were nonhearsay);

email communication was not hearsay because it was not used to prove the content of the communication but had significance to corroborate inventor’s conception prior to patent application

false endorsements on checks were verbal acts as one part of proving fraudulent transaction)

testimony of investors as to statements by salesmen admissible to show existence of fraudulent scheme

judicial judgment is not hearsay but an operative legal act when it determines the rights and duties of the parties in the case

(statement soliciting a bribe)

(racial epithets uttered to plaintiffs in racial discrimination case)

(altered inspector’s certificates in fraud case); People v. Scearce, 87 P.3d 228, 233–34 (Colo. App. 2003) (ruling that

statements made between criminal participants during conspiracy regarding use of force were performative or verbal acts and not hearsay)

(statement of teacher that he intended to kill principal in prosecution for terroristic threats); K

(in perjury prosecution, application for driver’s license in false name admissible to show false statement was made); Hanson v. Johnson, 161 Minn. 229, 201 N.W. 322 (1924)

(spoken words constituting a partition of corn crop between landlord and tenant);

statement by defendant’s stepmother giving him permission to be on the property was a verbal act as a license for him to be there);

statements made during controlled drug sale by defendant were verbal acts or verbal parts of acts giving them meaning);

treating nonsense statements to prove intoxication or insanity as words having independent legal significance or verbal acts).

Question 3

Verbal Acts

Answer 3

1. Verbal acts
   - verbal conduct to which the law attaches duties and liabilities, which is not evidence of assertions offered testimonially
   - words of contact; offer/acceptance;
   - the utterance by D of words relied on

as constituting
a slander or
deceit
for which damages are sought.

false statements by telemarketers in a fraud prosecution, which were verbal acts, were not offered for the truth but indeed were offered because they were false and accordingly were not hearsay);

statements made by members of transnational romantic scam to their deluded targets were the operative words of the criminal action and therefore were nonhearsay);

email communication was not hearsay because it was not used to prove the content of the communication but had significance to corroborate inventor’s conception prior to patent application

false endorsements on checks were verbal acts as one part of proving fraudulent transaction)

testimony of investors as to statements by salesmen admissible to show existence of fraudulent scheme

judicial judgment is not hearsay but an operative legal act when it determines the rights and duties of the parties in the case

(statement soliciting a bribe)

(racial epithets uttered to plaintiffs in racial discrimination case)

(altered inspector’s certificates in fraud case); People v. Scearce, 87 P.3d 228, 233–34 (Colo. App. 2003) (ruling that

statements made between criminal participants during conspiracy regarding use of force were performative or verbal acts and not hearsay)

(statement of teacher that he intended to kill principal in prosecution for terroristic threats); K

(in perjury prosecution, application for driver’s license in false name admissible to show false statement was made); Hanson v. Johnson, 161 Minn. 229, 201 N.W. 322 (1924)

(spoken words constituting a partition of corn crop between landlord and tenant);

statement by defendant’s stepmother giving him permission to be on the property was a verbal act as a license for him to be there);

statements made during controlled drug sale by defendant were verbal acts or verbal parts of acts giving them meaning);

treating nonsense statements to prove intoxication or insanity as words having independent legal significance or verbal acts).

Question 4

Verbal Acts

Answer 4

1. Verbal acts
   - verbal conduct to which the law attaches duties and liabilities, which is not evidence of assertions offered testimonially
   - words of contact; offer/acceptance;
   - the utterance by D of words relied on

as constituting
a slander or
deceit
for which damages are sought.

false statements by telemarketers in a fraud prosecution, which were verbal acts, were not offered for the truth but indeed were offered because they were false and accordingly were not hearsay);

statements made by members of transnational romantic scam to their deluded targets were the operative words of the criminal action and therefore were nonhearsay);

email communication was not hearsay because it was not used to prove the content of the communication but had significance to corroborate inventor’s conception prior to patent application

false endorsements on checks were verbal acts as one part of proving fraudulent transaction)

testimony of investors as to statements by salesmen admissible to show existence of fraudulent scheme

judicial judgment is not hearsay but an operative legal act when it determines the rights and duties of the parties in the case

(statement soliciting a bribe)

(racial epithets uttered to plaintiffs in racial discrimination case)

(altered inspector’s certificates in fraud case); People v. Scearce, 87 P.3d 228, 233–34 (Colo. App. 2003) (ruling that

statements made between criminal participants during conspiracy regarding use of force were performative or verbal acts and not hearsay)

(statement of teacher that he intended to kill principal in prosecution for terroristic threats); K

(in perjury prosecution, application for driver’s license in false name admissible to show false statement was made); Hanson v. Johnson, 161 Minn. 229, 201 N.W. 322 (1924)

(spoken words constituting a partition of corn crop between landlord and tenant);

statement by defendant’s stepmother giving him permission to be on the property was a verbal act as a license for him to be there);

statements made during controlled drug sale by defendant were verbal acts or verbal parts of acts giving them meaning);

treating nonsense statements to prove intoxication or insanity as words having independent legal significance or verbal acts).

Question 5

3 Non-HSY. VEC
To show that a statement was made but not offered for its truth

Answer 5

1. V - Verbal Acts - Legally operative words
   - to prove a legal effects
   
   • words of contract formation (offer/
     acceptance)
     - to prove an element of a cause of action
   • defamation
   • perjury
   • bribery
2. E - Effect on the person who Heard or Read the statement
3. C - Circumstatial Evidence of Speaker’s state of mind
   a/ to show that D is mentally ill/incompetent [God told me to kill him] offered not for its truth but to show that D’s mental disorder

Question 6

Statements offered for their truth

Answer 6

1. Two Non-HSY exclusions [PP] used to prove the truth of the matter asserted
   P - Prior statements of trial W
   P - Party Admissions
   a/ prior statements of trial W
   > W must he testifying at trial
   = Prior statements of Identification
   = Prior inconsistent statement under oath
   = Prior Consistent statements pre-motive
   = Opposingparty’s statement (“party admission”)
   —any statement made by opposing party
   - adoptive admissions,
   
   • agent/employee, or coconspirator can be used against that party.
2. Hearsay exceptions: witness must beunavailable: (mnemonic =FFFDS)
   F - Forfeiture by wrongdoing(witness tampering)
   F - Former testimony under oath
   F - Family or personal history(birth, marriage, divorce)
   D - Dying Declaration
   W believes death is impending; r
   Relates to cause or circumstances of death;
   Criminal homicide or civil)
   S - Statement against interest(declarant must know it is against interest when made)