Danforth Case Study

1082 Words5 Pages
QUESTION 1 SMITH/JOHNSON/DANFORTH/BUCHANAN The prosecution wants to introduce the following items into evidence: * The “Pay/Owe Ledger” of Danforth * Agent Buchanan’s Testimony of Sally’s reaction to a photo. * Officer Smith’s testimony of what Johnson told him regarding Danforth. Hearsay/Nonhearsay. Hearsay is an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. LEDGERS FOUND IN DANDFORTH ‘S VAN - HEARSAY/HEARSAY EXCEPTION A search incident found a variety of drugs and other paraphernalia in Danforth’s van as well as a ledger, according to the facts, that document the amounts and types of drugs sold and to whom these drugs were sold as well as what monies were exchanged. Is this ledger…show more content…
. BUCHANAN-SALLY HEARSAY/NONHEARSAY Hearsay An out of court statement offered for evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Here, Buchannan, and agent in the DEA, will testify that he spoke with Sally, whose son overdosed on cocaine. The facts do not directly indicate if Sally’s son received his cocaine from Danforth. However, Sally’s reaction of fainting when she saw the photograph of Danforth can be inferred that she recognized the Defendant, Danforth, who sold the drugs to her son who overdosed. Can Buchannan’s testimony be offered into evidence as either non-hearsay or under a hearsay exception? The Effect on the Listener – under “Nonhearsay” will apply as the photograph did have an effect on Sally. And no hearsay exception is required. It is not hearsay. Sally was clearly affected by the photograph of her son’s alleged supplier. The fact of the matter that Sally was asked to identify who could have potentially been the reason her son overdosed, is considered nonhearsay under identification under Federal Rule of…show more content…
CEO Charlie Duffy. * Testimony of Carly Simmons – observer of Charlie’s actions with Luke an attorney. HEARSAY/NONHEARSAY Hearsay is an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. The testimony of Frank Torino, Sales Manager of Novelty. HEARSAY/Non-Hearsay Hearsay – Supra Will Frank Torino’s testimony regarding Nordstrom’s regional manager’s phone call to him (Frank), be admitted as hearsay? If it is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Here, Frank is testifying as an agent of Novelty, that Nordstrom’s called Frank to indicate that Novelty breached their vendor agreement. The NonHearsay would be under “Verbal Acts” since the truth of that matter is not at issue. Verbal acts - verbal acts not offered for their truth. Non hearsay. An offer made or to defame someone. Such a statement is not excluded by the hearsay rule, because it has a legal significance completely apart from its truth or falsity. The testimony of Pam Duffy, wife of Gadget Co. CEO Charlie Duffy. Will Pam’s testimony regarding what an employee of Novelty said to her husband be admissible? Marital

More about Danforth Case Study

Open Document