How have the courts interpreted the hearsay rule?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. One 1948 Chevrolet Convertible Coupe, 280 P.2d 193 (Cal. App. 1955):

A distinction is made between statements the making of which is in controversy and statements relating to the facts in controversy. The hearsay rule does not forbid the introduction of evidence that a statement was made, where the making of the statement is significant irrespective of the truth or falsity of its content. Werner v. State Bar, 24 Cal.2d 611, 621, 150 P.2d 892.

The contention that the statements are not hearsay is based on the untenable premise that they were not offered

Page 198

Other Questions


How have courts interpreted section 1016.5 of the California Immigration Code and how have the courts interpreted the word 'court' in that section? (California, United States of America)
How have courts reviewed a trial court's ruling on the hearsay nature of evidence in a sexual assault case? (California, United States of America)
How has the California Supreme Court interpreted the hearsay rule in social studies? (California, United States of America)
How does the Court of Appeal interpret the evidentiary rulings of the Superior Court of Justice? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the exclusionary rule adopted by the California Supreme Court in the context of Proposition 8? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts interpreted the evidentiary rulings of a trial court? (California, United States of America)
How has the court interpreted the rules of evidence in cases dealing with self-confessed statements made outside of court? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the hearsay rule in the context of impeachment evidence? (California, United States of America)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
Does the "right ruling, wrong reasoning" rule apply to an evidentiary ruling that required the trial court to make findings of fact? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.