Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

O idaho supreme court agreed and reversed resopndents

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: ee Idaho v. Wright, applies only to evidence offered against an accused thus far (confrontation clause grounds) A court when determining the admissibility of a narrative, must examine it sentence by sentence and rule upon the admissibility of each "single declaration" or "remark" statement as defined in Williamson = single declaration or remark. Statement must be offered as evidence of a material fact. Redundant with rules 401 and 402 but probably means that the exception should not be used for trivial or collateral matters. Statement must be more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts. Courts sometimes exclude hearsay offered under the residual exception where the declarant or another person with personal knowledge is able to testify concerning the matter or a more persuasive document might have been obtained. Last resort type of provision in the nature of things..normally only going to be invoked when there is no other evidence on the poin...
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.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online