Hearsay Exam All Possible Questions
with Verified Answers 2024 Update
with Complete Solution
Why do we have a hearsay rule? How does it affect the
... [Show More] fact-finding process? ✔✔The jury can't
judge hearsay very well b/c it consists of a statement that we are not watching being made. So
we can't judge 4 things: memory, sincerity, perception, and narration. We usually judge those
things by listening to testimony and cross-examination. We can't cross-examine the declarant.
And even if the witness happens to be the declarant, we did not see her say the statement in
context. We need contemporaneous observation and cross-examination. Without that, we do not
have a reliable basis to make a determination. There are about 30 exceptions to the hearsay rule.
Another reason for the hearsay rule is the 6th Amendment: "In all criminal prosecutions, the
accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him . . . ."
If the witness and the declarant are the same person (i.e., if the witness is testifying about her
own out-of-court statement), why should the statement ever be classified as hearsay? ✔✔The
difficulty is that the out-of-court statement is still twice removed from the event. Certainly,
because the witness is the one who made the out-of-court statement, it is possible to conduct
some cross-examination about he veracity of the statement, but the passage of time between the
making of the statement and its repetition in court still presents a problem. Our memories of
events are affected by subsequent events, and this is especially true when people have vested
interest in a particular version of the event, as is the case at trial. Or perhaps it would have been
possible to judge the sincerity of the statement if we had been present when it was first made, but
by the time he repeats it in court, he has prepared himself more effectively to hide any
dishonesty. Even if the witness and the person who made the out-of-court statement are the same
person, the "twice-removed" issue makes it more difficule to assess the veracity of the statement.
Suppose a statement is hearsay and is not admissible under an exception. If the judge believes
that the probative value of the statement is not outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice,
does the judge have the authority to admit the evidence? ✔✔NO. The hearsay rule is a
categorical rule of exclusion (with a lot of exceptions). There is no rule that allows "good"
hearsay. There is a residual exception that we will study.
To prove that Defendant committed the crime, a police officer testifies that at a line-up, an
eyewitness to the crime pointed to Defendant when asked whether the person who committed the
crime was among those in the group. Is the eyewitness's conduct a statement? ✔✔Yes. This is
non-verbal conduct that was an assertion.
To prove that Defendant committed the crime, evidence is offered that a bloodhound trained to
track a scent followed a trail from the crime scene and "pointed" to Defendant. Is this a
statement? ✔✔No. A dog cannot be a declarant. You cannot cross-examine a dog. [Show Less]