Declarant Witness Hearsay Exceptions Flashcards
(40 cards)
Declarant-Witness hearsay exceptions
- past inconsistent statements made under oath at trial/hearing/depostion
- past consistent statements to rebut fabrication charge or restore credibility
- statements of ID
FRE 612
adverse party has certain rights to use writing to refresh memory
FRE 613 is about ___
impeachment (can’t come in for its own truth)
Under 613(a) when examining witness about a prior statement a party need not __
show or disclose to the witness
Under 613(a) a party must upon request ___
show contents of prior statement to the adverse party’s attorney
Difference between 613 and 801(d)(1)
613 can only come in to show lied, 801 can come in for truth of prior statement because it was taken under oath
FRE 613(B) says that extrinsic evidence of witness prior inconsistent statement admissible only if ___
witness given opp to explain or deny AND adverse party given opp to examine witness about it
Woman claims D robbed her of all money, but had taken cab home and paid cabbie (according to what cabbie told cops after).
- Inadmit under 801(d)(1)(A) bc prior statement needs to be in prior proceeding, very limited. Doesn’t include talking to cops.
- Admit under 613 to show inconsistency. Limiting instruction to show this is coming in for inconsistency, not truth. (Means you can’t say in, e.g., closing that woman paid cabbie → no evid!)
612 (b) holds that for writing used to refresh a witness, the adverse party is entitled to ____ AND any part that is unrelated ___
have it produced at hearing/inspect it/cross-examine about any related part,delete it
FRE 613(a) says that the party need not ____ but must ___
show to witness, on request show to adverse party attorney
FRE 613(b) says that extrinsic evidence of witness prior inconsistent statement is admissible only if ____ AND ___
witness given opp to explain or deny, adverse party given opp to examine witness about it
613(b) about opportunity to explain doesn’t apply ____
for 801(d)(1)(A)
Topic of 613
past inconsistent statements offered to impeach
Conditions for declarant memory/availability for 613
must testify at current proceeding
Conditions of past statement for 613
questioning lawyer good faith belief witness made past statement
Topic of 801(d)(1)(A)
past inconsistent statements offered substantively
Conditions for declarant 801(d)(1)(A)
must testify at current proceeding and subject to cross about the prior statement
804(b)(1) is about ___
past testimony when declarant unavailable
Requirements for past testimony under 804(b)(1)
- past statement was testimony (under oath)
- at trial/hearing/deposition
- subject to exam by party against whom now offered who then had similar motive
Decedent and X involved in motor crash, decedent estate sues NCDOT about bad stop sign that caused the crash. NCDOT questions witness engineer that says previous reporting he did found no issue with stop sign. Decedent evidence that report prepared after accident found stop sign too far out? Admit?
Admit under 613(b) to impeach, not a 407 issue because about not telling truth
Harris told co-conspirator Durand “Remember we sold watches” after Harris arrested for fraudulent stock recs. Durand testifies against Harris, says doesn’t remember saying anything back to Harris. Harris lawyer wants to play recorded statement of Durand’s reply. Admit?
Admit, 613(b) inconsistency, not 608(b) issue because it is specific instance but not about character for untruthfulness, here it is showing inconsistency
Ince convicted of assault. Neumann gave signed, unsworn statement to police that Ince admitted to firing shots in concert parking lots. At trial, Neumann’s memory failed and govt tried to refresh with written statement but still didn’t remember. Govt called police officer to impeach Neumann. Result?
don’t admit (otherwise admissible hearsay but only purpose to circumvent hearsay 403)
613 about attacking inconsistency not about getting confession
No need here to attack credibility because Neumann testimony not actively damaging govt case
At grand jury, DV victim testifies “He intentionally beat me”. At trial says “No I bumped into the door. Admit?
Admit under 801(d)(1)(A), comes in for truth
801(d)(1)(B) is about ___
past consistent statements