A pretrial identification is exempt from the federal hearsay rule only if the declarant -- the witness who makes the pretrial identification -- makes the pretrial identification after perceiving the person the witness so identified.

United States v. Wilmore, 381 F.3d 868, 872-873 (9th Cir. 2004) (reversing conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm because defendant did not have the opportunity for cross-examination with regard to grand....The right of confrontation guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States bars the introduction against a criminal defendant of testimonial hearsay by a nontestifying declarant unless (i) the absent declarant is unavailable to testify at trial and (ii) the defendant had an adequate opportunity to cross-examine the absent declarant prior to trial.

United States v. Cianci, 378 F.3d 71, 101 (1st Cir. 2004) (upholding trial court's admission of Pannone's taped statements as co-conspirator's statements because they "were not made 'after the fact,' but were uttered....A statement falls within the hearsay exemption for statements of co-conspirators only if the statement was made in furtherance of the conspiracy.

Mickler v. Fahs, 243 F.2d 515, 517 (5th Cir. 1957) (holding, in plaintiff store operator's action against defendant tax collector for recovery of income tax deficiencies, fraud penalties, and interest, that....Federal Rule of Evidence 410 or a comparable State rule bars the use of a nolo contendere plea (no contest plea) as evidence in any proceeding against the defendant who entered this plea.