Letters purpose is to serve notice through mailing

Info icon This preview shows pages 8–10. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
letter's purpose is to serve notice through mailing, this act of  mailing is not hearsay.  Letter sent to D not admitted to prove  truth that D lived there.  It is admissible b/c purpose is to imply  from sender's behavior that D lived there.  U.S. v. Singer  (p.156) 2. INDIRECT HEARSAY  - Testimony about personal knowledge about  subject matter, such as birthdate and place, info on parents, etc. even  though this info came from another.  Although technically W is testifying about what others have told her and is hearsay, ct still allows it unless it is not central point of contention.   a. W testimony about what W said in conversation, even though did not  reveal what other person said in conversation, is still hearsay .  W  serving as transparent conduit to what other person said which is  inadmissible hearsay.  Still hearsay b/c reveals what other person said indirectly and offered for truth of matter asserted.  U.S. v. Check  (p.  132). b. Implied Assertion i. Using words that causes one to maker further INFERENCES   ("That fellow Higgins went out of here carrying money bags"  implies that Higgins did it) not clear if allowed or not.  Using  words that make point INDIRECTLY  but are not conveyed by  actual words spoken is hearsay .  ("they ought to put Higgins in  jail for this and throw away key" indirectly shows that Higgins  robbed bank.)  (p. 155).  Depends if have basis for saying it. ii. Using extrajudicial statements which implied knowledge and  belief by declarants of source of their knowledge regarding  ultimate fact in issue is hearsay.  Statements of 3rd party  declarants that they thought D committed murder implied that D  committed murder because only D could have told them.  This  goes to truth of matter asserted and is hearsay.  U.S. v. Pacelli   (p.162) iii. Declarant stating "I didn't tell them anything about you" to  coconspirator in front of police is HEARSAY.  Statement,  although does not say she was involved, can imply she was and  was offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, i.e. that  coconspirator and declarant were together. Prob. 3-M (p. 166-67). iv. Farther away inference is from truth asserted, more not hearsay  and therefore admissible.  But farther inference is away, may be  less relevant. 8
Image of page 8

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
D. If statement NOT OFFERED TO PROVE TRUTH  of matter asserted but for  some other reason , it is NOT hearsay.  1. IMPEACHMENT OF W Prob. 3-C (p. 138) Offer statement showing W made inconsistent statement.  Don't care  about substance of statement.
Image of page 9
Image of page 10
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern