Essay on Hearsay

Submitted By fong1987
Words: 8784
Pages: 36
Open Document
The University of Florida
Fredric G. Levin College of Law
Evidence
Fall 2010
Professor Pedro A. Malavet
NOTES: Part 03-a
Casebook Excerpts are from Mueller & Kirkpatrick, Evidence Under the Rules (6th Ed., Aspen Law and Business 2008). They are preceded by the pertinent page number, placed within brackets. Note however that I have used multiple editions of this text over the past seven years and that may produce some numbering discrepancies.
III. Hearsay, First file of Three.
[pic]
The Forest in Chapter III:
On our Initial Look at Hearsay, ask:
The Forest in Chapter III:
On our Initial Look at Hearsay, ask:
(1) Is the offered evidence relevant? [FRE 401] [FRE 402]
(2) Is the offered evidence hearsay? [FRE 801, et seq.]
(a) Does the evidence fit within the definition of hearsay of FRE 801(a),(b)&(c)?
(b) Even though it fits the 801(a),(b),(c) definition of hearsay, is it nevertheless within some exemption that expressly defines it as "not-hearsay" or "nonhearsay" [FRE 801(d)]?
(c) Even though it fits the 801(a),(b),(c) definition of hearsay, AND despite it failing to be exempted by 801(d), is it nevertheless within some exception found in the rules, especially in FRE 803 and 804?
(3) Should the offered evidence be excluded, despite being relevant, and regardless of the answer to the hearsay question? [FRE 403]
As you noted in Chapter 3, this analysis can be quite complex. Consider that you have to examine acts and statements in their context, in order to answer the hearsay question. Humans communicate in complex ways, therefore, you have to imagine the entire scene, rather than focusing on a cold transcript of what was said or done. Hence the casebook authors' references to "performances" or to the "performative aspects of the assertions and acts." [Click here for more on this].
(1) Is the offered evidence relevant? [FRE 401] [FRE 402]
Remember that only relevant evidence (FRE 401) is admissible (FRE 402), so you need to establish the evidential hypothesis that favors admissibility or the irrelevant evidence will be excluded under FRE 402 and the analysis of admissibility stops here.
Another issue that may be relevant here is conditional relevance. For example, the child's testimony in Problem 3-I at page 151, was only admissible after direct testimony of what the room actually looked like was offered AND it matched what the child had said. While this might also be classified as a 403 reliability question, I think it is better to look at it as a threshold relevance question.
(2) Is the offered evidence hearsay? [FRE 801, et seq.]
This is a difficult technical rules question. However, in simple terms, if the offered evidence is (1) within the definition of hearsay, and is not saved by an (2) exemption or (3) exception, it must be excluded under FRE 802, and the analysis of admissibility would stop here.
The analysis here goes like this:
(a) Does the evidence fit within the definition of hearsay of FRE 801(a),(b)&(c)?

If the answer is NO, then it is NOT hearsay and you move to the 403 question. (You may have to explain here however how the evidence is hearsay for one purpose but not hearsay for another.) If the answer is YES you move to 801(d) and then to the other sections of chapter VIII to see if there is an applicable exemption or exception.
(b) Even though it fits the 801(a),(b),(c) definition of hearsay, is it nevertheless within some exemption that expressly defines it as "not-hearsay" or "nonhearsay" [FRE 801(d)]?
If the answer is YES, then go to 403. If the answer is NO, move on in chapter VIII of the FRE.
(c) Even though it fits the 801(a),(b),(c) definition of hearsay, AND despite it failing to be exempted by 801(d), is it nevertheless within some exception found in the rules, especially in FRE 803 and 804?
(3) Should the offered evidence be excluded, despite being relevant, and regardless of the answer to the hearsay question? [FRE 403]
Relevant and nonhearsay evidence may
Show More

Related Documents: Essay on Hearsay

Sixth Amendment Vs Hearsay Rule

“In certain circumstances recognized exceptions to the hearsay rule may be used to permit the admission of evidence against the accused in a criminal trial without violating the rights given to him by the sixth amendment ” said Seidelson (76). They have used this hearsay rule as a way to get around the rights granted by the sixth amendment. This is not right that we are given a right then it is taken away by claiming that it is hearsay (Seidelson 76).…

Words 511 - Pages 3

Court Case Observation Paper

she could be a good parental figure, while the plaintiff was showing that the mother was not able to provide for the children. For these three evidentiary issues, the judge that was presiding was Honorable Scott Sparks. The three issues dealt with hearsay, relevance, and a compound question. For each of these issues, there will be a discussion of the Federal Rule of Evidence that is implicated, the judge’s ruling on the issue, and whether or not the ruling was appropriate by comparing it to the Federal…

Words 1925 - Pages 8

Week 5 Research Assignment Essay

Week 5 Research Assignment According to the rules listed in article VII regarding the hearsay federal rules, writings are normally considered hearsay and are inadmissible unless they fall under an exception to the hearsay rule. Business records do not count as hearsay. For something to be a business record, it must satisfy the following, general conditions: Made in the normal course of business, relied on by the business, made at or near the occurrence of the act the record purports to record…

Words 505 - Pages 3

R. V. Parrott Summary

on an hearsay evidence becomes more prominent. On July 15, 1994, around seven PM, the accused was seen at Waterford psychiatric hospital talking to the female resident who later brought her into his vehicle. This was testified by James Barry, a psychiatric nursing assistance about two hundred feets away…

Words 1034 - Pages 5

Law - common trial objections Essay

COMMON TRIAL OBJECTIONS "Objection, your Honour, the question is ambiguous." A question is ambiguous if: It may be misunderstood by the witness. It is objectionable on the ground that it may take on more than one meaning. “Objection, your Honour, the question is irrelevant”. A question is irrelevant if: This objection is properly made to exclude evidence which has no logical tendency to prove a fact in issue in the case. "Objection, your Honour, the question mis-states the evidence…

Words 350 - Pages 2

Essay about acc 4435

Unit 5—Overview of the Federal Rules of Evidence The law of evidence is a set of rules and principles that govern the admissibility of evidence into various types of judicial and administrative proceedings. Evidence is any matter, verbal, physical or electronic that can be used to support the existence of a factual proposition. One of its main purposes is to protect the jury from being misled. There are two basic categories of evidence, direct and circumstantial. Within these general groups…

Words 8538 - Pages 35

Essay on NYS Mock Trial Rules

speculate). 4) Hearsay Rule 401 – Hearsay: A statement made out of court. If made by a party to the case and is being used against that party, it is allowed. Reasons for Excluding Hearsay – If the opposing party was denied the opportunity to cross examine the declarant about the statement, hearsay may be excluded. The opposing party had no chance to test the declarant’s perception, memory, or sincerity. 5) Exceptions Rule 402 – Admission of a Party Opponent – Judge may admit hearsay…

Words 1266 - Pages 6

Salem Witch Trials Research Paper

women were imprisoned on the accusation of witchcraft. By the end of the trials, 19 people were unfairly hung and executed; it was the largest witch trial to occur in the U.S. The Salem Witch Trials were unfair executions of the innocent caused by hearsay and mass panic. Elizabeth Parris and Abigail Williams were born into wealthy families; they had everything one could ask for. Until they decided they did not know enough, being young, the girls attempted to perform witchcraft for…

Words 1520 - Pages 7

Crawford V Essay

contempt if the witness refuses to answer a question, unless it is protected by privilege. These methods are threatened by the way hearsay interferes and affect them. The Confrontation Clause of the Six Amendment states that “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right… to be confronted with the witnesses’ evidence against him…” The implication of hearsay evidence for this clause is explicit: If out-of –court statement evidence is admitted against the accused, this person becomes…

Words 1468 - Pages 6

Memorandum On The History Of Tawdry's Contracts With B-Grade Entertainment

Manufacturing VP to Tawdry’s President qualifies as a business record and will be admissible as such by the judge at trial? Rules: Under the Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 803(6) business records can come in as evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule if such business records were: (i) made at or near the time by someone with knowledge; (ii) kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a business; (iii) made as a regular practice; (iv) certified or testified to by a qualified witness;…

Words 477 - Pages 2