How has the hearsay exception been interpreted?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. McNeil, B250116 (Cal. App. 2015):

admissibility did not depend on any exception to the hearsay rule. (People v. Merriman (2014) 60 Cal.4th 1, 72 ["The evidence was admitted for a purpose other than for the truth of the matter asserted, and therefore need not have met the reliability requirements of a hearsay exception"].)

Other Questions


Is a city's interpretation of a section of the California Civil Code interpreted in the context of an administrative agency's interpretation? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the interpretation of a federal agency's interpretation of the California Civil Code? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for admitting hearsay evidence under the hearsay exception? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for interpretation of the California Code of Civil Procedure when it comes to the interpretation of statutory interpretation? (California, United States of America)
Can a defense interpreter only interpret words of the witness interpreter at trial? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's statement of intent to commit a crime a hearsay exception to the hearsay rule? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will a defendant be found admissible under the hearsay rule under the state of mind exception to hearsay? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a hearsay exception to the hearsay rule? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted hearsay exceptions? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between hearsay and non-hearsay evidence under the state of mind exception? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.