Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

8034 not limited for purposes of medical treatment it

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: e had entered into on Bailey's behalf. o Claims that Norton lured the victims to his shop, had them load the tires, and then shot them both. Norton contends that he caught the men stealing the tires, that they attacked him, and that he killed them in selfdefense. Procedural Posture: Norton thinks that the trial court erred by admitting specific testimony of Bailey's widow o Bailey's widow testified that in the middle of the night her husband got a call and after hanging up told her that "He had just talked to Ray on the phone, and he told him to pick up Preston and come help him work at the shop." Issue: Is the evidence inadmissible to show the declarant's state of mind? Holding: Only part of Bailey's widows' statements should have been admitted: o Should have redacted out the memory part "the Ray called me part", only should have left in the statement that he was going to the shop to help Norton out! o "Bailey's statement to his wife that he intended to go to Norton's...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online