hearsay evidence law

• State v. Durham, (Ohio 2011)

Appeal and Error, failure to argue; Constitutional Law, effective assistance of counsel; Evidence, hearsay, refreshed recollection; Felonious assault; Kidnapping

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Maerlender, (Ohio 2011)

Constitutional Law, effective assistance of counsel; Evidence, hearsay, irrelevant, sufficient, weight; Kidnapping; Sexual Offenses, gross sexual imposition, rape.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Shortcuts to 'truth': the legal mythology of dying declarations.

The general exception for hearsay in the Federal Rules of Evidence regarding dying declarations needs a more logical, scientific formulation. The present rule allows unsubstantiated, prejudicial hearsay into evidence. The importance of presumed innocence and truth to both the law and to the accused deserve a rule which is rigorously applied in deciding what should become evidence.

• American Criminal Law Review
• Vol. 35 Nbr. 2, January 1998

• State v. McArthur, (Ohio 2007)

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE -- Crim.R. 29(A); acquittal. CRIMINAL LAW – manifest weight of evidence; robbery; force. CRIMINAL LAW/EVIDENCE – hearsay; excited utterance; abuse of discretion; harmless error; Evid. R. 404(A)(1); Evid.R. 803(2).

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Grand Jury

... authority to identify suspects, present evidence personally held by individual jurors, and determin...Hearsay Evidence: Admissible before a Grand Jury?. The RUL...

• West's Encyclopedia of American Law
• Fri–Jam

• State v. Urso, (Ohio 2011)

DRUNK DRIVING - same outlet shared by breathalyzer instrument and appliance; failure of breathalyzer instrument to comply with owner's manual does not amount to violation of Department of Health regulation. CRIMINAL LAW - PLEAS, MOTIONS & OTHER HEARINGS - when motion in limine amounts to motion to suppress statement; when officer asks defendant if he is willing to take breathalyzer test and defendant says he is drunk or he is guilty, officer's question is not custodial interrogation and Miranda warning is not required; mistrial; trial court has duty to ensure transcript published to jury is accurate representation of tape recording; material differences. CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - hearsay; citizen's 911 call reporting suspect driving erratically is nontestimonial and does not implicate c...

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Turner, (Ohio 2010)

Carrying a Concealed Weapon; Constitutional Law, right of confrontation, search and seizure; Evidence, circumstantial, hearsay, present sense impression, sufficiency; Motions, to suppress evidence.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Reconceptualizing Confrontation After Davis

On Jun 19, 2006, in the consolidated cases of Davis v. Washington and Hammon v. Indiana (hereafter simply Davis), the Supreme Court clarified the constitutional requirements for confrontation of accusers. The Court ruled that the Confrontation Clause generally bars a hearsay statement elicited by police unless the declarant appears at trial. But the Court made clear that when the emergency ends, a hearsay statement to police cannot surmount the Confrontation Clause unless the declarant appears for cross-examination. So the Davis ruling accomplished a rare feat: it caused consternation among both prosecutors and defense attorneys. The Davis ruling seems more sensible, however, when viewed as a first step toward a new regime for the regulation of hearsay -- a regime in which legislation p...

... a conviction for domestic assault.9 The evidence at trial showed that the defendant had battered hi...

• Texas Law Review
• Vol. 85 Nbr. 2, December 2006

• State v. Tate, (Ohio 2011)

CRIMINAL LAW - home invasion; complicity to aggravated robbery; complicity to aggravated burglary; complicity to kidnapping; firearm specification; forfeiture; sufficiency of the evidence; manifest weight of the evidence; circumstantial; aiding and abetting; getaway driver. CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - out of court statement; not hearsay; not offered for truth of the matter asserted; explain act; Evid.R. 403; no confusion; not misleading; no unfair prejudice; no confrontation clause issue.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Butcher, (Ohio 2007)

INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL – failure to object to hearsay statements; prejudice to defendant. CRIMINAL LAW/EVIDENCE – hearsay statements; Evid.R. 803(2); excited utterance; children deliberated prior to making statements; reflective thought; Evid.R. 803(4); statements made for the purpose of medical diagnosis or treatment; child’s statement to doctor; no voir dire of children; manufactured witness; state-selected doctor; purpose of investigation and prosecution.

• Ohio Supreme Court