cvls hearsay refresher
DESCRIPTION
CVLS Hearsay Refresher . Who Cares About Hearsay? A Four-Step Hearsay Formula Hearsay Exceptions Questions. Hearsay: Why We Care. Hearsay raises concerns about reliability. Is the witness’s testimony reliable enough to be admitted as evidence?. Hearsay: Why We Care. Perception - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
CVLS Hearsay Refresher
• Who Cares About Hearsay?
• A Four-Step Hearsay Formula
• Hearsay Exceptions
• Questions
![Page 2: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Hearsay: Why We Care
Hearsay raises concerns about reliability.
Is the witness’s testimony reliable enough to be admitted as evidence?
![Page 3: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Hearsay: Why We Care
• Perception
• Memory
• Narration
• Sincerity
![Page 4: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Hearsay: Why We Care
• Oath
• Observation
• Cross-Examination
![Page 5: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Defining Hearsay: A Four-Step Formula
• A declarant’s
• Out-of-court
• Statement
• Offered at trial to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
![Page 6: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Defining Hearsay: A Four-Step Formula
• A declarant’s
• Out-of-court
• Statement
• Offered at trial to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
![Page 7: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Defining Hearsay: A Four-Step Formula
The declarant is the person who made the statement.
Out-of-court means that the declarant did not make the statement while testifying at the current trial or hearing.
![Page 8: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
FRE 801(a)-(c): Defining Hearsay
• A declarant’s
• Out-of-court
• Statement
• Offered at trial to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
![Page 9: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
FRE 801(a): What is a statement?
• An oral assertion
• A written assertion
![Page 10: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
What About Non-Verbal Conduct?
Non-verbal conduct may be hearsay if it is intended as an assertion and offered for the truth of the matter asserted.
![Page 11: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
FRE 801: Defining Hearsay
• A declarant’s
• Out-of-court
• Statement
• Offered at trial to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
![Page 12: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Why the “Truth” MattersAn out-of-court statement offered to prove that what a declarant said is true is inadmissible [if no exception applies] as there is no way to verify it for accuracy.
The declarant is not at trial, under oath, observable by a jury, or subject to cross.
![Page 13: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Non-TOMA = Non-Hearsay
If counsel can convince the court that the out-of-court statement is offered for a reason OTHER than its truth, the statement is admissible as non-hearsay.
What are some other reasons?
![Page 14: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Non-TOMA: Common Examples
OOCS offered to prove the effect or impact on the listener.
OOCS offered to show a legal obligation (“verbal or legal act”).
![Page 15: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Legal Acts. . .
Transactions:
• As we sat with the realtor, James said, “I accept the seller’s offer.”
• Then Bob said to the estate planner, “I will leave my summer cottage to my third wife, Irma.”
![Page 16: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Non-Hearsay: Effect on the ListenerStatements offered for EOTL do not depend on the truth of the assertion.
What matters is simply that the words were spoken and the listener heard them.
![Page 17: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Non-Hearsay: Effect on the ListenerThe key in effect-on-listener is not the P-M-N-S of the out-of-court speaker but what the out-of-court listener heard.
It is critical to examine why the evidence is being offered.
![Page 18: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
A Place In the SunA bus driver testifies about a conversation he heard between a man and a murder victim, during which she demanded that he marry her.
Is this testimony based on impermissible hearsay? How might you argue for its admission at trial?
![Page 19: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Effect on the ListenerThe statement, whether true or not, is relevant to show that the alleged killer had a motive to murder the victim.
![Page 20: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Mundy’s First TrialA DEA task force agent testifies, “I got a call from my informant. He told me that [defendant] was selling drugs from his mother’s home. We then began conducting visual surveillance of the home.”
Mundy objects! Hearsay?
![Page 21: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Mundy’s First TrialThe evidence was offered not for the TOMA – but to explain why the task force began to watch the home, a fact that did not depend on the tip’s truth.
The court provided a limiting instruction that the tip should only be used to show why the officers went to the home.
![Page 22: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
“Not Hearsay” = Exceptions
Prior statements by witnesses would “fall within the definition of hearsay” but are “excluded” from it.
Treat these statements as exceptions to the four hearsay components.
![Page 23: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
FRE 801(d)(2): Statement of Party-Opponent
A statement is not hearsay if it is offered against an opposing party and:
(A) Was made by the party in an individual or representative capacity [or]
![Page 24: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
FRE 801(d)(2)(A): Statement of P-O
A party’s own words are not hearsay when offered against her at trial.
![Page 25: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
FRE 801(d)(2): Statement of Party-Opponent
Agents:
(D) Was made by the party’s agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship and while it existed [or]
![Page 26: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
FRE 801(d)(2): Statement of Party-Opponent
Co-conspirators:
(E) Was made by the party’s co-conspirator during and in furtherance of the conspiracy.
![Page 27: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
FRE 801(d)(1)(A): Prior Inconsistent StatementDeclarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination about a prior statement
The statement is inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony
The statement was given under penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or at a deposition.
![Page 28: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
FRE 801(d)(1)(A): Prior Inconsistent Statement
To be admissible, the prior statement need not have been subject to cross-examination at the time that it was made -- just at the time it is offered.
![Page 29: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Example: Domestic Assault• Alleged victim testifies in
front of a grand jury that her boyfriend hit her in the eye.
• At trial, she then testifies that it was an “accident.”
• The prosecutor then moves to admit the her grand jury testimony. In? If so, how?
![Page 30: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
FRE 803: Declarant Unavailability Immaterial
FRE 803 is based upon “the theory that [certain] hearsay statement[s] may possess . . . guarantees of trustworthiness sufficient to justify non-production of the declarant even though he may be available.”
![Page 31: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
FRE 803(1): Present Sense Impression
• A statement
• Describing or explaining an event or condition
• Made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it.
![Page 32: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
FRE 803(2): Excited Utterance
• A statement
• Relating to a startling event or condition
• Made while the declarant was under the stress of the excitement that [the event] caused.
![Page 33: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
803(1) vs. 803(2)
![Page 34: CVLS Hearsay Refresher](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062521/56816959550346895de109cf/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Questions?