This is a cross reference. Click here to make the jump.

Cf. United States v. Alvarez, 972 F.2d 1000, 1004 (9th Cir. 1992) (upholding trial court's admission of a manufacturer's inscription on the gun because it was not an assertiiion subject to the hearsay rule as "an inscription....Not every human utterance is capable of amounting to hearsay. Only an utterance that contains an assertion can amount to a "statement" for purposes of Federal Rule of Evidence 801(a) or hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(c).

Weil v. Seltzer, 873 F.2d 1453, 1460 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (vacating judgment in survival and wrongful death action in which the trial court allowed the testimony of physician's former patients as evidence of habit, on ground that such evidence was admitted for improper purpose of showing that the physician...If a pattern of behavior of a natural person does not rise to the status of a habit, it may constitute a character trait and such non-habitual behavior may be barred by the prohibition against circumstantial character evidence.

Fed. R. Evid. 602 ("A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter.").A person has the personal knowledge that a witness must have if and only if the evidence is sufficient to permit a reasonable trier of fact to conclude that the witness personally perceived the matter. The preliminary question of personal knowledge is governed by the standard of whether the evidence is sufficient to allow a reasonable person to conclude that the person has personal knowledge; the applicable standard is not the more demanding preponderance of the evidence standard.