This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: Court rules that counsel didn't sufficiently show why conversation #2 was relevant to the issue at trial nor did it specify what parts of conversation #1 would be qualified or explained by conversation #2. Curative Admissibility ("Opening the Door") And the Rule of Completeness Texas Rule 107, Not in federal rules (common law notion)
GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS v. ARCHIBALD [Curative Admissibility "Opening the Door"; and the Rule of Completeness]
Facts: Defense asks Williams (the mom) if she had overheard any conversations with Latoya and Tasha concerning Archibald. Answer to this is not hearsay. Prosecution, on redirect, gets Williams to testify as to what Tasha had told her about LaToya and Archibald. Procedural Posture: Defense objects to the admission of the hearsay: "Tasha told me that Archibald and Latoya were kissing while dancing at a party." District court ruled that counsel had "opened the door" to the disputed testimony. Issue: By asking Williams if she had overheard any conversations with Latoya and Tasha concerning Ar...
View Full Document