Constitutional law and principles affecting the admissibility or inadmissibility of hearsay evidence

Cf. United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, pin? (1998) (admissibility vel non of exculpatory polygraph evidence in general court-martial; in upholding Military Rule of Evidence 707, which barred polygraph evidence,....A per se rule barring a criminal defendant from testifying about a matter about which he or she was previously hypnotized is unconstitutional.

Fed. R. Evid. 1001(4) ("A 'duplicate' is a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, or by means of photography, including enlargements....A duplicate is a counterpart produced (a) from the same impression as the original; (b) from the same matrix; (c) by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures; (d) by mechanical or electronic re-recording; (e) by chemical reproduction; or (f) by equivalent techniques that accurately reproduce the original.

Schindler v. Joseph C. Seiler & Synthes Spine Co., L.P., 474 F.3d 1008, 1011-1012 (7th Cir. 2007) (holding that plaintiff's testimony [about what Dr. White had said to him] was correctly excluded by trial court as inadmissible hearsay because "Dr. White's....To qualify as a statement of present sense impression for purposes of the hearsay exception by that name, the statement must be spontaneous.