enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Crawford v. Washington - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawford_v._Washington

    Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that reformulated the standard for determining when the admission of hearsay statements in criminal cases is permitted under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment.

  3. Hearsay in United States law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay_in_United_States_law

    The Federal Rules of Evidence define hearsay as: A statement that: (1) the declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and (2) a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. (F.R.E. 801(c)). [2] The "declarant" is the person who makes the out-of-court statement. (F.R.E. 801(b ...

  4. Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York v. Hillmon - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Life_Insurance_Co...

    Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York v. Hillmon, 145 U.S. 285 (1892), is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that created one of the most important rules of evidence in American and British courtrooms: an exception to the hearsay rule for statements regarding the intentions of the declarant. [1]

  5. Hearsay - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay

    "Hearsay is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." [1] Per Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(a), a statement made by a defendant is admissible as evidence only if it is inculpatory; exculpatory statements made to an investigator are hearsay and therefore may not be admitted as ...

  6. Party admission - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_admission

    The rationale for a party admission exception to hearsay exclusion can be mostly easily understood by reference to the rationale for the hearsay rule itself. Affidavit evidence consisting of out-of-court statements is not subject to cross-examination. Affidavit evidence is thought to detract from the truth-finding mission of a trial.

  7. Federal Rules of Evidence - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Evidence

    The Federal Rules of Evidence settled on one of these four definitions and then fixed the various exceptions and exemptions in relation to the preferred definition of hearsay. On the other hand, the law of privileges remains a creature of federal common law under the Rules, rather than the subject of judicial interpretation of the text of the rule.

  8. United States District Court for the District of New Jersey

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District...

    The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (in case citations, D.N.J.) is a federal court in the Third Circuit (except for patent claims and claims against the U.S. government under the Tucker Act, which are appealed to the Federal Circuit). The Judiciary Act of 1789 established New Jersey as a single District on September ...

  9. Excited utterance - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_utterance

    The basis for this hearsay exception is the belief that a statement made under the stress is likely to be trustworthy and unlikely to be a premeditated falsehood. Compared to present sense impression, excited utterance is broader in scope for permitting a longer time lapse between event and statement, and a wider range of content in the statement.