Hearsay Exclusions and Exceptions Flashcards
Standard of Proof for Hearsay Exceptions
The court must decide any preliminary questions about whether a witness is qualified, a privilege exists, or evidence is admissible. In so deciding, the court is not bound by evidence rules, except those on privilege.
NOTE - this is a preponderance of the evidence standard
Hearsay Within Hearsay
Hearsay within hearsay is not excluded by the rule against hearsay if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the rule.
Statement by Party Opponent
A statement that is offered against an opposing party, and was made by that party in an individual or representative capacity is excluded from the definition of hearsay.
EXCLUSION
Adoptive Statement by Party Opponent
A statement that is offered against an opposing party, and the statement is one that the party manifested that is adopted or believed to be true is excluded from the definition of hearsay.
EXCLUSION
Adoptive Statement by Silence
Silence may be an adoptive admission when the circumstances are such that if the statement that was made wasn’t true, the party would have protested.
Four Preconditions for Adoptive Statements
1) The party heard and understood the other party’s statement
2) the party was at liberty to respond (look for violations of self-incrimination)
3) the circumstances naturally called for a response
4) the party failed to respond, or he responded but did not rebut, deny, or demur
Statements by Authorized Party
A statement that is offered against an opposing party, and the statement was made by a person whom the party authorized to make a statement on the subject is excluded from the definition of hearsay.
The statement must be considered, but does not by itself establish the declarant’s authority.
EXCLUSION
Statements by Employees
A statement that is offered against an opposing party, and the statement was made by the party’s agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship while it existed is excluded from the definition of hearsay.
The statement must be considered, but does not by itself establish the existence of scope of the relationship.
EXCLUSION
Statements by Co-Conspirators
A statement that is offered against an opposing party, and the statement was made by the party’s co-conspirator during and in furtherance of the conspiracy is excluded from the definition of hearsay
The statement must be considered, but does not by itself establish the existence of the conspiracy or participation in the conspiracy
EXCLUSION
What are the three exclusions when a declarant testifies at trial and subject to cross examination
1) Prior inconsistent statements
2) prior consistent statements
3) statements of identification
Subject to Cross Examination
A witness is regarded as subject to cross examination when the witness is placed on the stand, under oath, and responds willingly to questions. This is true even if the witness cannot remember the event surrounding the statement or the statement itself.
613 - Prior Inconsistent Statements for Impeachment
1) When examining a witness about about the witness’s prior statement, a party need not show it or disclose its content to the witness. But the party must, on request, show it or disclose its content to an adverse party’s attorney.
2) Extrinsic evidence of a witness’s prior inconsistent statement is admissible only if the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement and an adverse party is given an opportunity to examine the witness about it, or if justice so requires. This does not apply to an opposing party’s statements.
NOTE - you don’t have to ask the witness about the statement and can still introduce the statement if the witness may be called back to the stand at some point latter in trial
Prior Inconsistent Statement Hearsay Exclusion
If the declarant testifies and is subject to cross examination about a prior statement, and the statement is inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony and was given under penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, other proceeding, or in a deposition, it is excluded from the definition of hearsay.
EXCLUSION
NOTE - in a criminal case, the government may not call a witness to the stand for the sole purpose of impeaching that witness with a prior inconsistent statement
Prior Consistent Statements
If the declarant testifies and is subject to cross examination about a prior statement, and the statement is consistent with the declarant’s testimony and is offered
1) to rebut an express or implied charge that the declarant recently fabricated it or acted from an improper influence or motive in so testifying; or
2) to rehabilitate the declarant’s credibility as a witness when attacked on another ground (normally a non-character ground);
It is excluded from the definition of hearsay. EXCLUSION
NOTE - to rebut an express of implied charge of fabrication, the statement must have been made prior to when the alleged motive to fabricate the testimony arose.
Statements of Identification
If the declarant testifies and is subject to cross examination about a prior statement, and the statement identifies a person as someone the declarant perceived earlier, it is excluded from the definition of hearsay.
EXCLUSION
Exceptions when the declarant is unavailable
1) Former Testimony
2) Statements Against Interest
3) Dying Declarations
4) Statement of Personal or Family History
5) Forfeiture by Wrongdoing
Unavailability Definition
A declarant is considered to be unavailable as a witness if the declarant:
1) is exempted from testifying about the subject matter of the declarant’s statement because a privilege applies;
2) refuses to testify about the subject matter despite a court order to do so;
3) testifies to not remembering the subject matter;
4) cannot be present to testify because of death or a then existing infirmity, physical illness, or mental illness; or
5) is absent from the trial or hearsing and the statement’s proponent has not been able, by process or other reasonable means, to procure the declarant’s attendance or testimony.
NOTE - unavailability does not apply if the statement’s proponent procured or wrongfully caused the declarant’s unavailability as a witness in order to prevent the declarant from attending or testifying
Former Testimony
If the declarant is unavailable, former testimony is not excluded by the rule against hearsay that
1) was given as a witness at a trial, hearing, or lawful deposition, whether during the current proceeding or in a different one; and
2) is now offered against the party who had an opportunity and similar motive to develop it by direct, cross, or redirect examination.
Important Notes for Former Testimony
Grand Jury - Grand jury testimony is never admissible against a defendant under this exception because the defendant has no opportunity to question the witness at a grand jury proceeding
Similar Motive - this is a factual inquiry based on the similarity of the issues and the context of the questioning. The court must compare the fundamental objectives of the questioning.
Statements Against Interest
If the declarant is unavailable, a statement is not excluded by the rule against hearsay that:
1) a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would have made only if the person believed it to be true because, when made, it was so contrary to the declarant’s proprietary or pecuniary interests or had so great a tendency to invalidate the declarant’s claim against someone else or to expose the declarant to civil or criminal liability.; and
2) is supported by corroborating circumstances that clearly indicates its truth worthiness if it is offered in a criminal case as one that tends to expose the declarant to criminal liability
Broad Self Inculpatory Statements
When there has been a broad self inculpatory statement by the declarant, the statement must be analyzed as a series of single declarations or remarks to determine whether each individual statement is against the declarant’s interest.
Only the self inculpatory statements are admissible, statements inside the broad confession that are not self inculpatory are not admissible.
Dying Declarations
The following is not excluded by the rule against hearsay if the declarant is unavailable
– in a prosecution for HOMICIDE or in a civil case, a statement that the declarant, while believing the declarant’s death to be imminent, made about its cause or circumstance.
NOTE - does not apply in an attempted homicide prosecution
Statement of Personal or Family History
Statements by an unavailable declarant concerning births, marriages, divorces, relationships, genealogical status are admissible provided that
1) the declarant is a member of the family in question or intimately associated with it; and
2) the statements are based on the declarant’s personal knowledge of the facts or their knowledge of family reputation.
Forfeiture by Wrongdoing
A statement is not excluded by the rule abasing hearsay when the declarant is unavailable, and the statement is offered against a party that wrongfully cause, or acquiesced in wrongfully causing, the declarant’s unavailability as a witness, and did so intending that result.
Hearsay Exceptions when Declarant’s Availability is Irrelevant
1) Present Sense Impressions
2) Excited Utterance
3) Present State of Mind
4) Statement made for medical diagnosis or treatment
5) Recorded Recollection Exception
6) Business Records
7) Absence of Records
8) Public Records
9) Vital Statistics
10) Absence of Public Records
11) Learned Treatises
12) Ancient Documents
13) Documents Affecting Property Interests
14) Reputation
15) Family Records
16) Market Reports