How to Analyze Hearsay on an Evidence Essay (Pt. 2): What is NOT Hearsay? (FRE 801(d))
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 ต.ค. 2018
- 📚 LAW SCHOOL & BAR EXAM PREP
Law school prep: studicata.com/law-school
Bar exam prep: studicata.com/bar-exam
Free courses: studicata.com/free-courses
❤️ COMMUNITY & REVIEWS
Community: studicata.com/groups/community
Testimonials: studicata.com/testimonials-an...
Submit a review: shoutout.studicata.com
📱 TECH
iOS app: studicata.com/ios
Android app: studicata.com/android
📣 ABOUT
Studicata provides a fresher, more relatable way to prep for law school finals and the bar exam. With top-rated video lectures, exam walkthrough videos, outlines, study guides, strategy guides, essay practice exams, multiple-choice assessments, performance tracking, and more-Studicata has you covered with everything you need to ace your finals and pass the bar exam with confidence.
Email: info@studicata.com
Learn more: studicata.com
🎬 VIDEO INFO
How to Analyze Hearsay on an Evidence Essay (Pt. 2): What is NOT Hearsay? (FRE 801(d))
HEARSAY (FRE 801(c))
An out-of-court statement that is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted is hearsay UNLESS the statement satisfies a condition enumerated under Rule 801(d) of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
NON-HEARSAY CONDITIONS (FRE 801(d))
A statement that meets the following conditions is NOT hearsay.
DECLARANT-WITNESS'S PRIOR STATEMENTS (FRE 801(d)(1))
(A) Prior Inconsistent Statements
An out-of-court statement that is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted is NOT hearsay if: (1) the declarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination about the prior statement; (2) the prior statement is inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony; and (3) the prior statement was given under penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition.
(B) Prior Consistent Statements
An out-of-court statement that is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted is NOT hearsay if: (1) the declarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination about the prior statement; (2) the prior statement is consistent with the declarant’s testimony; and (3) the prior statement is offered to rebut an express or implied charge that the declarant recently fabricated the statement or acted from a recent improper influence or motive in so testifying; OR to rehabilitate the declarant's credibility as a witness when attacked on another ground.
(C) Prior Statements of Identification
An out-of-court statement that is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted is NOT hearsay if: (1) the declarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination about the prior statement; and (2) the declarant identifies a person as someone the declarant perceived earlier.
OPPOSING PARTY'S STATEMENTS (FRE 801(d)(2))
An out-of-court statement that is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted is NOT hearsay if the statement is offered against an opposing party and: (1) was made by the party in an individual or representative capacity; (2) is one the party manifested that it adopted or believed to be true; (3) was made by a person whom the party authorized to make a statement on the subject; (4) was made by the party’s agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship and while it existed; or (5) was made by the party’s co-conspirator during and in furtherance of the conspiracy.
Learn more: studicata.com
My head was spinning before I watched this video. All of the sudden, everything makes so much more sense now. Thank you!
I am currently a paralegal student taking an evidence class. Your Hearsay videos have really helped me understand the material we are learning this week. Thank you!
Awesome. Glad this helped! 👍
Thank you for your videos, they have been super helpful! Honestly they are the best thing I've seen so far! You are very talented!!
No problem, happy to help! Thank YOU for the support.
Please note, both of your lecture videos on FRE 801(c) and FRE 801 (d) are about to extremely relevant. Thank you for breaking this down in such a simple manner for those of us who aren't law students. I personally found these videos trying to research what "hearsay" is and whether or not the Trump impeachment will be able to proceed legally. Looks like it will despite what the talking heads are saying! Thanks!
This video may be the reason I pass evidence this semester! You are doing God's work
Hey man, this is an amazing video!!!!
So I'm not a law student or anything but i've been getting interested into law for a recent bit of time. I started to learn about many legal rules, including hearsay and realizing that there were multiple exceptions. I really wanted to inform myself and stumbled across your video. You're videos are so informative, even someone such as myself with no legal schooling can follow. Without having the stop rewind the video go back. Rewatch the same part over nad over again... I can watch your entire 20 minute video in almost one take, thanks to how well you break down each and every part of hearsay. You do an amazing job of keeping me on track and understanding through the whole video. Great job!
I have watched your lectures for several different subjects. They are all wonderful. Thank you!
I'm a little late to discovering your videos for my Feb 2019 exam but they have been extremely helpful even on such short notice! Thanks for putting these up! In the unfortunate event that I do not make it through, I'll definitely look into signing up for Studicata.
Thank you for the support! Hopefully, we do not hear from you. 🙏
oh my god this video helped me make sense of things! wow
Msn you're good with this...very understandable....wow..thanks bro
You. Are. A. Lifesaver.
Will be taking the July bar and already paid for one the commercial bar prep courses😩😢 but this is so good!
No problem-you got this! Thanks for tuning in.
You are the best! Thank you so much!
Sure-happy to help!
Just out of curiosity, is video #3 in the Evidence Crash Course set to private on purpose?
Hi Michael, does 801(d)(1) only apply when declarant witness is subject to cross examination 20:01. Prior consistent statement is only offered in evidence in redirect examination after credibility is attacked in cross examination right?
Love the videos, just a quick question. Does the declarant have to be present and subject to cross examination in order to use 801(d)(2)? Thank you!
Rex Malin no.
thank-you!
No problem, happy to help!
thank you very much for your videos
Happy to help!
@@studicata I have my evidence midterm Tuesday and the way you have laid it out is much better than them way my professor has
🚨 SPECIAL OFFER: Want to crush law school finals, rack up scholarship $$$, pass the bar exam, and practice law like a BOSS? Take the LEAP. Get started today for free at: www.studicata.com/leap
Admin law please !!!
I have a question. If a police officer says to me. "Say one more word and your going to jail." And I say another word and he arrests me. Can I use that against the police officer in court in regards to violation of 1st amendment
Yes, you can. You can argue that the statement is presented not for the truth of the matter (that you went to jail) but to show the affect it had on you (the listener) or the declarant state of mind, therefore it is not hearsay ;)
"Eric has been charged with a murder that occurred at midnight. Eric’s attorney wants to introduce Eric’s timecard which shows that he clocked in at 6:00PM and did not clock out until 2:00 the next morning." I know this is Hearsay, but whats the statement Eric's attorney showing the timecard in court?
Who would give you a thumbs down on this video. For some odd reason I am thinking of the two guys in the evolution movie that wrote cells are bad and got a C- lol
your halo is showing
Off topic... but sexy speaker. :-)