VIEW TREE
ICON KEY
2918:false:false:false:false:false:false:false:false:false:!:false:-1:-1
This is a cross reference. Click here to make the jump.
Add Comment
Contributed in 2009 by Peter Tillers
Last edited in 2009 by Joel Friedman
Browse from Not oral statements
Law
»
Courts
»
Evidence
»
Admissibility of evidence
»
Witness competence & credibility
»
Impeachment and rehabilitation of witnesses
»
Impeachment
»
In general a party has the right to impeach any witness
»
Different types of impeachment permissible
»
Untruthfulness
»
Types of evidence
»
Prior inconsistent statements: Cross-reference
You've hit the end
Contribution Suggestions
vouch for authority for rule...
The admission of a statement made other than at the trial does not violate the right of confrontation guaranteed to a criminal defendant by the...Kater v. Maloney, 459 F.3d 56, 67 (1st Cir. 2006) (upholding trial court's ruling which allowed testimony from witnesses who had been hypnotized because the "admission of this evidence [could not] possibly be....
in support of
The admission of a statement made other than at the trial does not violate the right of confrontation guaranteed to a criminal defendant by the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution if the maker of the statement -- the declarant -- testifies at the trial.vouch for authority for rule...
Hearsay evidence is inadmissible.Fed. R. Evid. 802 ("Hearsay is not admissible except as provided by these rules or by other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority or by Act of Congress.").
in support of
Hearsay evidence is inadmissible.vouch for authority for rule...
A thing or matter is sufficiently authenticated to be admissible in evidence if the authenticating evidence submitted to the trial court is...Fed. R. Evid. 104(b) ("When the relevancy of evidence depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the court shall admit it upon, or subject to, the introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding of the fulfillment of the condition.").
in support of
A thing or matter is sufficiently authenticated to be admissible in evidence if the authenticating evidence submitted to the trial court is sufficient -- strong enough -- to permit a reasonable jury or reasonable trier of fact to conclude that the proffered thing or matter is authentic, that the proffered thing or matter is what its proponent claims it is.