Evidence
Evidence tests the Federal Rules: relevance, hearsay, confrontation, character, impeachment, privileges, and expert testimony. Ask first whether the evidence is relevant and then whether it is hearsay.
Core rules
- Relevance under FRE 401 and 402; FRE 403 excludes unfair prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.
- Hearsay under FRE 801 is an out-of-court statement offered for its truth. Non-hearsay includes verbal acts, effect on the listener, state of mind, and impeachment.
- Exceptions: excited utterance under FRE 803(2), present sense impression, then-existing condition, business records, public records, learned treatises, former testimony, and dying declaration.
- Confrontation Clause: testimonial hearsay requires an unavailable declarant and prior cross-examination, unless forfeiture applies.
- Character: FRE 404(a) exceptions; FRE 404(b) other acts; FRE 405 methods of proof.
- Impeachment: prior inconsistent statements, bias, convictions under FRE 609, and reputation evidence.
- Privileges: attorney-client, spousal, psychotherapist; waiver by disclosure.
- Experts under FRE 702: qualification, reliability, and fit; basis under FRE 703.
Worked example
A bleeding victim calls 911 and says Marcus stabbed me. At trial Marcus claims hearsay. The statement is an excited utterance under FRE 803(2): a startling event and stress. Under Davis v. Washington, a 911 call for an ongoing emergency is nontestimonial, so the Confrontation Clause does not bar it even if the victim is unavailable. If the call were made after the emergency to report past facts, it may be testimonial.
Traps
Prior consistent statements are not automatically hearsay-free; they usually rehabilitate. Business records require a foundation and were made in the regular course. Hearsay within hearsay needs each layer to satisfy an exception. FRE 403 can exclude otherwise admissible evidence.