Smith p 179 reliability factors i statement made

Info icon This preview shows pages 11–13. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
COURTS EXCLUDE POLICE STATION INTERROGATIONS) State v. Smith  (p.  179) Reliability Factors i. Statement made closer to event so may be more reliable.  Less likely fear or  forgetfulness were factors. ii. Whether written by declarant or someone else.   ii. Original purpose of earlier statement. d. MEMORY LOSS or silence is often included under "inconsistency."  If W testified  before and now forgets or  is evasive, that is inconsistent.   (p. 186)  In some  jurisdictions, if memory loss is faked, it is inconsistent.  If memory loss is genuine, it is not inconsistent.  (p. 187, n.2)  DOES NOT HAVE TO BE COMPLETE  OPPOSITE, JUST DIFFERENT TESTIMONY. 11
Image of page 11

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
3. Consistent Statement  - Rule 801(d)(1)(B) a. Requirements i. Consistent with declarant's testimony ii. Statement offered to rebut an express or implied charge against declarant of  recent fabrication or improper influence or motive, i.e. prove you said same thing before if charged with changing your story.    b. DOES NOT  HAVE TO BE UNDER OATH. c. Some modern cases hold that only prior consistent statements made BEFORE the  supposed motive to fabricate arose.  But other courts have held that it is too difficult  to determine when the motive took place, some courts allow prior statements  anyway even if motivated to favor one party.  (p.190) 4. Identification of Person  - Rule 801(d)(1)(C) a. Requirements - Statement of identification of person after perceiving the person. b. Purpose i. Pre-trial identifications may be more trustworthy than in-court identifications. ii. Use as substantive proof of identity, not just as corroborating evidence.  c. Some IDs are not allowed.  Not allowed if ID obtained in postindictment lineup  procedures in which the accused is denied counsel.  (p. 194)  d. Composite sketch by artist of W's description of assailant is hearsay but falls under  this exception.  Same as if W had made a verbal description of assailant.   State v.  Motta , p. 194.  Both artist and W must be present for cross-x.   e. If cannot remember previous identification, doesn't matter for cross-x purposes.  As  long as at trial now to cross-x, that is enough.  (p. 198, n.5  Owen ) B. ADMISSION BY PARTY OPPONENT  - Rule 801(d)(2) 1. Purpose of Rule a. Impeachment effect b. Substantive proof of what it asserts c. Hearsay doctrine designed to exclude statements not subj. to cross-x.  But party  cannot complain that she has not had opportunity to cross-x herself.  ADVERSARY  SYSTEM gets at truth.  Party can deny admission or explain what admission meant.  2. GENERAL REQUIREMENT  - Statement offered AGAINST THE PARTY  OPPONENT .
Image of page 12
Image of page 13
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