Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Norton shot and killed two men at 6 am in his place

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: ve belief as to his wealth is totally irrelevant. The statement was offered to prove the fact that the D actually had the money not that the thought he had it. Consequently, the statement was not admissible under Rule 803(3). Joint Conduct: Although the matter is controversial, most courts admit a statement of A that he or she intends to do an act with B as evidence of both A's and B's subsequent conduct as in this case, but some courts require independent evidence corroborating the conduct of B. NOTE: Wellborn thinks there is not a good rationale for the Hillmon doctrine all of the hearsay dangers are still there, except for the fact that these are just really good pieces of hearsay (lots of cases hinge on them)....that's why courts are so eager to let this exception stand. Footnote 18 in Pheaster: Talks about a line of cases, Merkouris and Brown. Murder victim's statement of fear of defendant (like State v. Duke in Arizona see note 2, page 177) Not allowed! In all of these cases all you are basically saying so & so threatened me or so & so did something to scare me....and that's just memory or belief. In a m...
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