What is the test for admitting or denying hearsay testimony in a criminal case?

MultiRegion, United States of America

The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Gere, 662 F.2d 1291 (9th Cir. 1981):

Where hearsay testimony is conditionally introduced, we have required that the trial judge make the ultimate determination of whether a foundation has been established. United States v. Eubanks, 591 F.2d 513 (9th Cir. 1979); United States v. Weiner, 578 F.2d 757 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 981, 99 S.Ct. 568, 58 L.Ed.2d 651 (1978). Before the testimony will be allowed to go to the jury, the prosecution must show that (1) the declaration was in furtherance of the conspiracy, (2) it was made during the pendency of the conspiracy, and (3) there is independent proof of the existence of the conspiracy and of the connection of the declarant and the defendant to it. Weiner, 578 F.2d at 768.

The quantum of independent proof required for the third element of the foundation requirement is "sufficient, substantial evidence to establish a prima facie case." Weiner, 578 F.2d at 768. We have recently emphasized the importance of the first element in United States v. Fielding, 645 F.2d 719 (9th Cir. 1981), holding that mere descriptions of the conspiracy to a nonconspirator are not "in furtherance of" the conspiracy.

Page 1294

The trial judge may make a preliminary determination of admissibility or may admit the testimony conditionally, subject to "connecting up" with the foundation to be eventually laid by the prosecution. United States v. Zemek, 634 F.2d 1159, 1169 (9th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 916, 101 S.Ct. 1359, 67 L.Ed.2d 341 (1981) and --- U.S. ----, 101 S.Ct. 1525, 67 L.Ed.2d 821 (1981).

When there has been sufficient evidence to sustain a finding of conspiracy, we have held that giving an instruction like that given here not reversible error. We have called such an instruction "unduly generous." United States v. Miranda-Uriarte, 649 F.2d 1345, 1351 n.4, 1353 (9th Cir. 1981); United States v. Lutz, 621 F.2d 940, 946 n.2 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 859, 101 S.Ct. 160, 66 L.Ed.2d 75 (1980) and 449 U.S. 1093, 101 S.Ct. 890, 66 L.Ed.2d 822 (1980); United States v. Testa, 548 F.2d 847, 853 n.3 (9th Cir. 1977).

Other Questions


What is the test for admitting or denying evidence of criminal intent in a federal law case? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Does a party who is a defendant in a criminal case have the ability to raise issues in a declaratory judgment action that cannot be resolved in the criminal case? ("New York", United States of America)
Is a minor criminal offence included in the criminal history of a defendant in the Criminal History of the Criminal Code? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Can a defendant rely on hearsay testimony in a criminal case? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the test for admitting testimony regarding battered woman syndrome in a criminal case? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
In what circumstances have courts admitted expert testimony to assist the jury in assessing the credibility of witnesses in criminal child sex abuse cases? ("New York", United States of America)
Is there any case law where a defendant has admitted admitting to a criminal conspiracy? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Are there any cases where the Supreme Court has found that criminal convictions for common law crimes against individuals who have not been convicted of criminal convictions are sufficient grounds for criminal convictions? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
When counting criminal convictions for career offender purposes under section 4A1.2 of the Criminal Code, is the criminal conviction of a career offender included in the criminal record calculation? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the test for reversing a criminal conviction in a federal criminal case where a prosecutor made inappropriate remarks to a defendant? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.