Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

So if its a mechanical reproduction its a duplicate

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 is trying to prove the contents of a writing here! UNITED STATES v. GONZALES-BENITEZ [Best Evidence Rule When does the rule kick in? FRE 1002] Facts/Procedural: Drug case, undercover agent was wired. At trial, they don't bring in the tapes, just have the nark testify as to what was said in his conversations with the appellant. Appellants claim that since the conversations were recorded themselves, they were the "best evidence" of the conversations. Issue: Was it necessary to bring in the tapes under the "best evidence rule"? Does the "best evidence rule" even apply here? Holding: Government not trying to prove the terms of the content of a writing here, but rather oral statements...any evidence is competent to prove those oral statements, including the oral testimony of the undercover officers recollection. Now there happens to exist a writing, and they are not attempting to prove what was in the writing and there is no reason that they need to! If the government, instead of having the nark testify, had brought in a written documentation of what was in the tapes, then the best evidence rule would apply! Main Point: *Best evidence rule does...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online