Evidence Ala Rice

Front 1

"I know Thurshwell is selling drugs, because I bought drugs from him." Hearsay? Why/why not?

Back 1

FRE 804(b)(3) Hearsay Exception: Statement Against Interest ( Declarant Unavailable)

Hint 1

sqeek sqeek. i smell a rat.

Front 2

FRE 804(b)3 Statement Against Interest Elements

Back 2

1. declarant unavilable for life testimony.
2. declarant has personal knowledge.
3. statement was against declarant's peunary or proprietary interest at the time he made it. (*Com.Lw: against penal interest not included)
4. declarant knew statment was against her interest when she made it.
5. declarant made the statemen t under conditions of sincerity and no overriding motive to fabricate.

Hint 2

U.P.I.K.S
unappologetic people indicating kin speak.

Front 3

declarant is unavailable when:

Back 3

1. exempt due to privilege
2. refuses to testify
3. lack of memory of the subject of statement
4. physically inable

Hint 3

P.R.M.I

prissy refusal minimized inconvenience

Front 4

Declarant Unavailable Exceptions:

Back 4

Former Testimony: FRE803(b)1
Dying Declarations 804(b)2
Statements against interest 804(b)3
statements of personal or family history. 803(b)4

Hint 4

FDIH

Front 5

testimony is offered through an official transcript made at a prior proceeding. the court reporter is not physically present. the transcript is offered for truth.
1. How many levels of hearsay ?
2. How to fix?

Back 5

1. Two levels of hearsay.
2. a. the first level can be circumvented through past recollection recorded exception, present sense impression, public records and reports or business records exception. b- second level is resolved through the former tesimony exception. diagram pg. 394

Hint 5

double trouble.

Front 6

Statement Against Interest
COMMON v. FRE

Back 6

1. expands scope to declarations against penal interest. 2. may expand scope by requiring statement only "tend " to affect D's interest rather than req. a direct effect.

Front 7

Declarant Unavailable: requirements/tests

Back 7

1. use for exculpation: equal protection problem, declarant is unavailable. onus on criminal d to establish corroborating circ.
2. reasonable person test: objective tech. but can be subjective.
3. "tend" to suggest liability. is it probative at trial?
4. no overriding motive to fabricate.
5. admissibility of portions of statement not against declarent interest.

Front 8

Williamson v. United States (1994)

Back 8

Harris was arrested when police found coke in his trunk. Harris confessed but lied, then admitted the lie and said it was Williamson. Rule: 804(B)4covers only declarations within a confession that are individually self inculpatory. a good way to lie is to mix truth and fiction.

Hint 8

mixing truth and fiction to screw somebody else. FRE version
related to : LILLY V. VIRGINIA (constitutional version)

Front 9

Williamson v. United States and Lilly v. Virginia

Back 9

no declarations against interest which incriminate a third party, unless its totally trustworthy.
Williamson doesn't bind the states.