6) Hearsay Flashcards
(90 cards)
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)