Law Commons^™

Rule 801(D)'S Oxymoronic 'Not Hearsay' Classification: The Untold Backstory And A Suggested Amendment, Sam Stonefield

Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines Rule 801(d)’s oxymoronic treatment of admissions and prior statements as “not hearsay.” This “not hearsay” label is inaccurate – the evidence is hearsay, as defined in Rule 801(c) – and is inconsistent with the analytically important and well-established use of the term not hearsay to describe evidence that is actually not hearsay.

The Article tells the story of how the drafters of the Federal Rules of Evidence ended up with such a confused and confusing label and proposes an amendment that would classify admissions and prior statements as hearsay exceptions and place each in a new, separate, …

Proposed Evidence Rules 413 To 415 – Some Problems And Recommendations, James S. Liebman

Faculty Scholarship

Section 320935 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 proposes three new Federal Rules of Evidence-Rules 413-415 – that would liberalize the admissibility of "propensity evidence" in criminal and civil cases involving allegations of sexual assault and child molestation. This Article expresses some reservations about, and suggests some alternatives to, Proposed Rules 413-415.

Former-Testimony Exception In The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence, The , Michael M. Martin

Faculty Scholarship

According to one member of the Advisory Committee which drafted them, the proposed Rules of Evidence for the United States Courts and Magistrates were promulgated to "improve the truth-finding capacity of the courts," as well as to provide the benefits of simplification and uniformity. In much the same way that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have led to modernization of procedural rules in many states, the proposed Federal Rules of Evidence may be the vehicle by which improvements unsuccessfully codified in the Model Code of Evidence and the Uniform Rules of Evidence can finally be achieved across the United …