CHAPTER 4, PART 3 OF 3 RULE 804: DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE Prof. Janicke 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Chapter 8 Witnesses— Competency and Perjury.
Advertisements

1 Chapter 7 The Use of Hearsay in the Courtroom. 2 WITNESSES AND THE HEARSAY RULE When witnesses give their testimony, the subject matter is typically.
CHAP. 4, part 1 of 3: DEFINITIONAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE MEANING OF HEARSAY P. JANICKE 2012.
Prior Statements By Testifying Witnesses 801(d)(1)
CVLS Hearsay Refresher Who Cares About Hearsay? A Four-Step Hearsay Formula Hearsay Exceptions Questions.
CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION P. JANICKE Chap Authentication2 AUTHENTICATION A SUBSET OF RELEVANCE AUTHENTICATION EVIDENCE IS –NEEDED BEFORE DOCUMENTS.
Chapter 7: Evidence and Procedure Evidence: Proves/Disproves fact in issue Procedure: Rules of Court.
Randy J. Cox.  F.R.E. 301 is short and vague, with no definition of “presumption.”  Note F.R.E. 302 provides that state law governs the effect of presumptions.
Hearsay and Its Exceptions
PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS FRE 801(d) Non Hearsay by definition Rule 801(d)(1) Prior Statement by Witness is not hearsay If declarant testifies and.
CHAP. 3 : INTRODUCTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE P. JANICKE 2011.
The Roles of Judge and Jury Court controls legal rulings in the trial Court controls legal rulings in the trial Jury decides factual issues Jury decides.
Criminal Evidence 7th Edition
Confrontation After Crawford v. Washington Jessica Smith, Institute of Government June, 2004.
Hearsay Rule Lecture 6, 2014.
TRIAL INFORMATION Steps, vocabulary.
Crawford v. Washington US Supreme Court, March 2004 Implications for Elder Abuse Investigations Adapted from material presented June 30, 2004 by Sean Morgan.
CHAPTER X HEARSAY EVIDENCE. Hearsay Evidence Evidence of a statement that was made other than by the witness while testifying that is offered to prove.
Evidence Professor Cioffi 4/05/2011 – 4/27/2011.
CHAPTER 4, PART 2 OF 2: EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE THAT HEARSAY IS INADMISSIBLE P. JANICKE 2006.
Hearsay Exceptions Declarant Unavailable. Unlike FRE 803, FRE 804 provides exceptions where the Declarant Must be Unavailable to testify.
Confrontation Clause The right to confront and cross exam your accusers.
Trial advocacy workshop
OBJECTIONS IN COURT. WHAT ARE THEY? An attorney can object any time she or he thinks the opposing attorney is violating the rules of evidence. The attorney.
Crawford v. Washington US Supreme Court, March 2004 Implications for Elder Abuse Prosecutions Adapted from material presented June 30, 2004 by Sean Morgan.
Chapter 7 The Use of Hearsay in the Courtroom.
Chapter 16 Sections Objectives: 4.05, 4.09, 6.02, 6.07, 6.08.
Procedure Procedure at Trial. 1) Court Clerk reads the charge Indictment - if vague - quashed (struck down)
Basic Evidence and Trial Procedure. Opening Statement  Preview the evidence “The evidence will show”  Introduce theme  Briefly describe the issues,
EXCLUSIONS FROM HEARSAY Prior Inconsistent Statement, Prior Consistent Statements, Prior Identifications.
A Federal Defender’s Guide to Confrontation Jessica Smith School of Government, UNC-Chapel Hill.
CHAPTER 4, PART 3 OF 3 RULE 804: OUT-OF-COURT DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE Prof. Janicke 2015.
CHAP. 3 : INTRODUCTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE P. JANICKE 2008.
Unit 6 The Trial: Players, Motions, Hearings, and Pleas Or I am getting my day in court.
Chapter 1 The Pursuit of Justice Unit #1 Notes Packet.
Evidence in Court Holy Trinity Law Audrius Stonkus.
Crawford v. Washington US Supreme Court, March 2004 Implications for Courts NYC Elder Abuse Training Project.
CHAP. 13: AUTHENTICATION Prof. JANICKE Chap Authentication2 AUTHENTICATION A SUBSET OF RELEVANCE AUTHENTICATION EVIDENCE IS –NEEDED BEFORE.
Juvenile Justice. Why do we have a criminal justice system? What are the goals of the system? What are the things it is supposed to accomplish?
Law and Justice Chapter 14 - Trials. Due Process of Law Due Process of Law Due Process of Law Means little to people unless they are arrested Means little.
EVIDENCE ACT Law of evidence lay rules for the production of evidence in the court of law.
HEARSAY EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE LESS RELIABLE: RULE 804: DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE Prof. Janicke 2011.
PROCEDURES IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, 8 th ed. Roberson, Wallace, and Stuckey PRENTICE HALL ©2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ
HEARSAY! BY MICHAEL JOHNSON. COMMON LAW DEFINITION “ An out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted”
CJ227: Criminal Procedure Unit 6 Seminar Mary K Cronin.
Attorney/Judge. The purpose of opening statements by each side is to tell jurors something about the case they will be hearing. The opening statements.
Do now pg.59 1.What are all the steps in a criminal court case?
CHAP. 3 : INTRODUCTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE
Presented by CJS 200 Foundations of the Criminal Justice System
CONFRONTATION ARKANSAS APRIL 2011 MIKE DENTON.
HEARSAY EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE LESS RELIABLE: RULE 804: DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE Prof. Janicke 2010.
CHAPTER 4, PART 3 OF 3 RULE 804: OUT-OF-COURT DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE Prof. Janicke 2016.
HEARSAY EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE LESS RELIABLE: RULE 804: DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE Prof. Janicke 2012.
Criminal Evidence Marjie Britz Chapter Ten: Hearsay
Hearsay Hector Brolo Evidence, Law 16 Spring 2017.
CHAP. 3 : INTRODUCTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE
CHAP. 3 : INTRODUCTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE
HEARSAY DEFINITIONS [RULE 801, PARED DOWN].
How Witnesses are Examined
CHAP. 3 : INTRODUCTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE
CHAP. 4, part 1 of 2: DEFINITIONAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE MEANING OF HEARSAY P. JANICKE 2011.
CHAPTER 4, PART 2 OF 2: EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE THAT HEARSAY IS INADMISSIBLE P. JANICKE 2008.
CHAP. 3 : INTRODUCTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE
CHAP. 3 : INTRODUCTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE
CHAPTER 4, PART 3 OF 3 RULE 804: OUT-OF-COURT DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE Prof. Janicke 2015.
CHAP. 3 : INTRODUCTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE
CHAPTER 4, PARTS D-H RULE 804: OUT-OF-COURT DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOW “UNAVAILABLE” Prof. Janicke 2019.
Alison Chandler Hearsay Exceptions Continued Unavailability Former testimony Dying Declarations Declarations against.
CHAP. 4, part A: DEFINITIONAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE MEANING OF HEARSAY
Hearsay Exceptions - Rules 803 and 804
Presentation transcript:

CHAPTER 4, PART 3 OF 3 RULE 804: DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE Prof. Janicke 2014

THOUGHT TO BE WEAKER RULES DRAFTERS (AND COMMON LAW) DEVELOPED A SET OF HEARSAY EXCEPTIONS THAT COULD BE USED ONLY WHEN THE DECLARANT IS UNAVAILABLE AT TRIAL A COMPROMISE BETWEEN OUTRIGHT EXCLUSION AND OUTRIGHT ADMISSIBILITY

2014 MEANING OF “UNAVAILABLE” WITHOUT ANY CONNIVANCE BY PROPONENT, DECLARANT IS: –NOT FINDABLE –REFUSES TO ATTEND –REFUSES TO ANSWER EVEN WHEN DIRECTED BY COURT –HAS A LOSS OF MEMORY –IS DEAD –IS INCAPACITATED MENTALLY OR PHYSICALLY

PROBLEMS/CASES 4L 2014

FORMER TESTIMONY AT A HEARING OR DEPOSITION IN THIS OR ANOTHER CASE NOW-OPPONENT MUST HAVE HAD OPPORTUNITY AND MOTIVE TO CROSS-EXAMINE –DIRECTLY, or –THROUGH A PARTY WITH SIMILAR INTEREST (CIVIL CASES ONLY)

2014 SOME THINGS THAT WON’T QUALIFY AFFIDAVITS [NOT A HEARING OR DEPOSITION; NO CHANCE TO CROSS- EXAMINE] GRAND JURY TESTIMONY [NO CHANCE TO CROSS-EXAMINE]

2014 SOME THINGS THAT WILL QUALIFY NON-PARTY TESTIMONY AT EARLIER TRIAL OF THIS CASE NON-PARTY TESTIMONY AT A DEPOSITION IN THIS OR ANOTHER CASE (WHERE OPPONENT WAS PARTY) NON-PARTY TESTIMONY AT A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HEARING IN THIS CASE

2014 NOTE – AN OPPOSING PARTY’S TESTIMONY DOESN’T NEED THIS EXCEPTION –IF OFFERED BY THE ADVERSE PARTY, CAN BE OFFERED FREELY, REGARDLESS OF PRIOR OATH OR CROSS-EXAM OPPORTUNITY

2014 DYING DECLARATIONS SUPPOSED BASIS: NO ONE WOULD FALSIFY WHILE SOON TO MEET HIS MAKER REQUIREMENTS: –HOMICIDE OR CIVIL CASE –DECLARANT THOUGHT HE WAS DYING IMMINENTLY (NOT “GOING TO BE SHOT” SOME VAGUE FUTURE TIME) –STATEMENT WAS RE. CAUSE OF THE IMPENDING DEATH (i.e., WHODUNIT)

2014 EXAMPLES (GIVEN THE PROPER FOUNDATION FACTS) IN A HOMICIDE CASE: “JACK DID IT!!” IN A WRONGFUL DEATH ACTION: “BOB SHOT ME IN SELF-DEFENSE” IN A WRONGFUL DEATH ACTION: “I NEVER SHOULD HAVE EATEN THOSE OYSTERS”

2014 THIRD-PARTY CONCESSIONS STATEMENT THAT WAS AGAINST DECLARANT’S INTEREST –PECUNIARY –PENAL MADE BY A NON-PARTY MOST ARE OFFERED BY DEFENDANTS, CIVIL AND CRIMINAL, THROUGH WITNESSES –TO DEFLECT BLAME

2014 EXAMPLES OF NON-PARTY CONCESSIONS OFFERED BY D, THROUGH WITNESSES: TESTIMONY: “NONPARTY X SAID: ‘OUR TECHNICIAN WIRED IT WRONG’” NONPARTY X Co.’s DOCUMENT RECALLING X’S AUTOS FOR DEFECTIVE FUEL LINES TESTIMONY: “NONPARTY X SAID: ‘SORRY WE BLEW UP YOUR HOUSE’”

2014 RESTRICTION ON NON- PARTY CONCESSIONS WHEN OFFERED TO EXCULPATE A CRIMINAL ACCUSED: –MUST HAVE CORROBORATING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT “CLEARLY INDICATE ITS TRUSTWORTHINESS” –MOST CASES HOLD THEM INADMISSIBLE!! BASED ON A GENERAL MISTRUST OF THE CRIMINAL COMMUNITY

PROBLEMS/CASES 4M 2014

OUT OF COURT STATEMENT RE. FAMILY HISTORY EXAMPLE: TESTIMONY THAT “MY MOTHER TOLD ME I WAS HARRY’S SON” EXAMPLE: TESTIMONY THAT “HER FATHER TOLD ME JEAN WAS BORN IN THE NAVAL HOSPITAL AT NEWPORT” NOTE: RECALL THAT DECLARANT (MOTHER, FATHER) MUST BE UNAVAILABLE

2014 DECLARATIONS BY PERSONS WHO HAVE SINCE BEEN “RUBBED OUT” IF THE REMOVER IS A PARTY, THESE ARE NOW ADMISSIBLE AGAINST HIM EXAMPLES: –EARLIER 3 rd PARTY’S AFFIDAVIT –EARLIER 3 rd PARTY’S GRAND JURY TESTIMONY –EARLIER 3 rd PARTY’S ORAL REMARK –EARLIER 3 rd PARTY LETTER

2014 ADMISSIBLE HEARSAY DECLARANTS ARE IMPEACHABLE THEY ARE TREATED JUST LIKE WITNESSES TO PREVENT ABUSIVE USE OF EXCEPTIONS SAME RULES OF IMPEACHMENT

2014 THE “CATCHALL”: RULE 807 FOR THE “ALMOST” SITUATIONS FOR THE UNPREPARED LAWYER WHO DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO OVERCOME A SUSTAINED HEARSAY OBJECTION FOR THE JUDGE WHO WANTS TO BE BULLETPROOF ON APPEAL

2014 REQUIREMENTS: EVIDENCE OF A “MATERIAL FACT” –??? MORE PROBATIVE THAN ANYTHING ELSE REASONABLY AVAILABLE –A HAVEN FOR THE UNPREPARED IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE ADVANCE NOTICE REQUIRED

2014 COURT EFFECTIVELY REWRITES THE HEARSAY EXCEPTIONS USUALLY SEEN IN CIVIL CASES [THE BANE OF MY EXISTENCE; THE JUDGE USUALLY SMILES]

PROBLEMS/CASES Weaver 2014

A PROBLEM WITH SIXTH AMENDMENT CONFRONTATION CLAUSE, WHEN HEARSAY EXCEPTIONS ARE USED BY PROSECUTORS CRAWFORD v. WASHINGTON –“TESTIMONIAL” TYPE HEARSAY MUST BE KEPT OUT OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, DESPITE RULES 803, 804

PROBLEMS/CASES Crawford 2014