This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: hers? Holding: District Court did not err in admitting the testimony under 803(3): o Hillmon doctrine: When the performance of a particular act by an individual is an issue in a case, his intention to perform that act may be shown. From that intention, the trier of fact may draw the inference that the person carried out his intention and performed the act. Within this conceptual framework, hearsay evidence of statements by the person which tend to show his intention is deemed admissible under the state of mind exception. o Letter in Hillmon was admissible even though declarant stated that he was going to go do such and such with o
HILLMON. Admissible even though the declarant's statement of intention required the action of Hillmon as well. We read the note of the advisory committee on 803(3) as presuming that the Hillmon doctrine would be incorporated in full force, allowing admissibility of a statement of declarant's intention to perform subsequent acts even if it requires the action of others as well! Notes: Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Hillmon Not a case covered by Wigmore's argument, that the...
View Full Document