Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Preliminary question for judge to decide fre 603 oath

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: chibald, did the defense open the door to the hearsay statement? Holding: The door was not opened! William's testimony was not inadmissible for any reason, did not open the door! was not hearsay, therefore did not serve as a waiver for other related hearsay statements! William's testimony also does not follow under the rule of completeness b/c Williams' testimony on redirect examination probed a subject never raised during cross: What Tasha told William about Archibald and LaToya "Because defense counsel did not offer, or even raise the subject of, hearsay statements made by Tasha to Williams, the district court abused its discretion by admitting such statements on redirect examination" Notes: Because you have this harmless error doctrine where you introduce the same stuff yourself or allow it without exception, there is a sub-doctrine that is kind of an exception to that: IF you get screwed and your objection is overruled because they put on some stuff, it's not a waiver if you go into the same territory in an effort to reduce the damage (in...
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