Multiple Choice
1. The rule against hearsay and the _____ Clause of the Sixth Amendment deal with similar testimonial issues.
a.
Venue
b.
Counsel
c.
Public Trial
d.
Confrontation
2. For most exceptions to the hearsay rule under the Federal Rules of Evidence and in most states, _____.
a.
b.
c.
d.
3. Exceptions to the hearsay rule mandate that the hearsay offered have some _____.
a.
relation to the unavailability of the declarant
b.
indicia of reliability
c.
means of being corroborated
d.
relation to the burden of proof
4. With regard to testimonial hearsay, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Ohio v. Roberts in _____.
a.
U.S. v. Inadi.
b.
Pointer v. Texas.
c.
Crawford v. Washington.
d.
Minnesota v. Murphy.
5. Prior to Crawford v. Washington, if a form of statement was traditionally recognized as an exception to the
hearsay rule it was also recognized as an exception to the _____.
a.
Confrontation Clause
b.
right to counsel
c.
privilege against self-incrimination
d.
right to notice of the charges
6. The Crawford v. Washington decision protects _____.
a.
defendants
b.
the government
c.
each side equally
d.
only factually guilty defendants
7. For “testimonial” statements, Washington v. Crawford _____.
a.
aligns the hearsay rule and the Confrontation Clause.
b.
creates divergence between hearsay exception and the Confrontation Clause.
c.
changes nothing about the traditional relationship between the confrontation clause and hearsay
exceptions.
d.
will have no impact on hearsay exceptions in state evidence codes.
8. Under the “forfeiture by wrongdoing” rule, a defendant who deliberately makes a witness unavailable waives
_____.
a.
the right to object to hearsay with regard to that witness
b.
the privilege against self-incrimination
c.
the right to cross-examine any witness who presents hearsay about the unavailable witness
d.
the privilege to challenge the competence of any witness who presents hearsay about the unavailable
witness
9. Which matter describes a firmly rooted hearsay exception in the law of evidence?
a.
excited utterance
b.
statement of an accomplice
c.
personal diaries
d.
statements made while mentally incompetent
10. Under Federal rules, testimony about statements made by a person to show that the person was mentally ill
_____.
a.
are hearsay and not admissible
b.
are not hearsay
c.
are hearsay but admissible because of their indicia of reliability
d.
are excludable under Ohio v. Roberts
11. Statements made to a physician for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment _____.
a.
may be both privileged and an exception to the hearsay rule
b.
are an exception to the hearsay rule only if part of an excited utterance
c.
are an exception only if offered in the form of medical records
d.
are not an exception in any jurisdiction
12. There is a hearsay exception for business, government, and religious records as long as the records are
_____.
a.
over ten years old
b.
handwritten
c.
regularly kept
d.
not stored on computers
13. The statement by a shooting victim just prior to death would probably be admissible under the hearsay
exception for _____.
a.
victim statements
b.
murder witnesses
c.
statements for descriptions of medical condition
d.
dying declarations
14. If the declarant makes a statement that could subject them to criminal charges, the statement would probably
be admissible under the exception for statements _____.
a.
of exculpation
b.
against penal interest
c.
contrary to reputational security
d.
contrary to Miranda rights
15. One relatively recent set of exceptions to the hearsay rule has been created for _____.
a.
co-conspirators
b.
statements to physicians
c.
regularly kept records
d.
child victims of sexual abuse
16. The Confrontation Clause does not apply to _____ out-of-court statements.
a.
co-conspirators
b.
non-testimonial
c.
regularly kept records
d.
child victims of abuse
17. A(n) _____ is a statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the
stress of excitement caused by the event or condition.
a.
excited utterance
b.
statement to physicians
c.
dying declaration
d.
confession
18. The Confrontation Clause is found within the _____ Amendment.
a.
Third
b.
Fourth
c.
Sixth
d.
Seventh.
19. The hearsay exceptions, reliable or not, can no longer be used as a(n) _____for cross-examination under the
Confrontation Clause for “testimonial” statements.
a.
substitute
b.
limitation
c.
modifier
d.
exclusion
20. Certain business records, public records, records of religious organizations, and family records are
admissible under federal rules known as the _____ exception.
a.
regularly kept records
b.
notarized document
c.
public data
d.
confidential data
Case 8.1
Police respond to the scene of fight inside a local bar. The scene is chaotic with ambulance personnel attending
to an unconscious male. In the course of rendering aid to the victim, the victim and the victim’s clothing were
removed from the scene. The victim’s clothing and personal effects are collected by an emergency room nurse at
the hospital.
Police interview witnesses who report that the victim, Jeff Anderson, got into an argument with another bar
patron/accused for having several rounds of drinks put on the patrons tab. Witnesses also report that the
patron/accused struck Mr. Anderson with a close fist and two then exchanged several punches with Mr.
Anderson giving the patron/accused a bloody nose. The patron/accused then struck Mr. Anderson with a chair
knocking him unconscious and fled the bar.
Police interview the bar owner who reports that accused became enraged after getting the $500.00 credit card
receipt for his drink tab. The bar owner stated the “guy flipped out, nearly jumping over the bar when he saw
the amount of his tab”. The bar owner reported that he pointed Mr. Anderson and said “go talk to your friend –
he ordered three rounds for the bar on your tab.” Police ask for and receive copies of the credit card receipts for
the accused, Dick Grayson. The investigating officer responds to the hospital and takes a statement from the
victim who reports not knowing why he was attacked. While at the hospital the investigating officer asks if
anyone had sought treatment for facial injuries from a fight. It is determined that Mr. Grayson had been seen
and had reported to the registration nurse that his injuries were from “some guy sucker punching” him in a bar
and had also stated “you should see the other guy.” Mr. Grayson is taken into custody and is being escorted out
of the emergency room when he stops in front of room where the victim lying in a hospital bed being attended
to by medical personnel he blurts out “I’m in so much trouble” and asks the officers “is he going to make it.”
Mr. Grayson charged with aggravated assault.
21. At trial the defense attempts to block admission of the credit card transactions from the bar as hearsay. Are
the records admissible?
a.
Yes, as regularly kept business records
b.
No, not unless the credit card company testifies about them
c.
Yes, under the Co-conspirator Rule
d.
No, not without proof that the accused had actually approved them
22. Would the emergency room nurse’s testimony regarding Mr. Grayson’s statement to her about he got injured
in a bar fight fall under any hearsay exceptions?
a.
Yes, because it was an excited utterance.
b.
Yes, because there was no expectation of confidentiality
c.
No, because it requires the fact finder to draw inferences
d.
No, because of the physician-patient privilege
23. At trial the arresting police officer testifies to Mr. Grayson’s excited utterance and actions when he passed
the victim, as they were escorting him out of the emergency room. Are excited utterances an exception to
hearsay rules?
a.
Yes, because there was no expectation of confidentiality
b.
Yes, because it was an excited utterance.
c.
No, because it requires the fact finder to draw inferences
d.
No, because Mr. Grayson had been drinking
Case 8.2
Mayberry Police receive a 911 call in which an argument, with a woman screaming, can be heard in the
background. What sounds like a violent struggle with breaking glass and a male voice screaming “no more
cheating for you bitch” can be heard as the 911 dispatcher tries to get a response. The dispatcher relays this
information to the patrol units dispatched to 123 Main Street.
When police arrive on scene they find the door is locked but can see a female victim lying on the floor amidst
broken furniture. Police force entry and find the victim lifeless. They also find a trail of blood leading to the
back door. According to neighbors, the victim, Shannon Mathews, was recently separated from her husband and
had only moved in a few months prior. The next door neighbor, Mary Hart, reports that she had witnessed a few
heated arguments between the victim and her estranged husband in the driveway over the past few months. In
fact after the last incident a week prior, the victim had asked Mrs. Hart to call the police if she saw her
estranged husband at the house as she was in fear of him.
A check of police dispatch records revealed two prior 911 calls from Mrs. Mathews about threats from Matt
Mathews. Also in the system was an active domestic violence order of protection for the victim, baring contact
from Matt Mathews.
Matt Mathews is pulled over for speeding and is arrested for DWI by police in the adjacent town of Mount Pilot
five minutes after the call to 123 Main. Mr. Mathews has fresh injuries including scratches on his face and is
highly agitated. While the officers are trying to conduct field sobriety tests, Matthews repeatedly mumbles “the
bitch deserved it.” The motor vehicle stop and arrest are recorded on the police dash camera. Due to the active
restraining order in the police data base, the accused’s fresh injuries and his statements, Mount Pilot Police
contact Mayberry Police to conduct a welfare check on Mrs. Mathews. They are advised of the active murder
investigation and asked to hold Mr. Mathews.
The medical examiner conducts an autopsy as well as forensic testing that reveals DNA evidence and blood
other the victim’s on her clothing. During the investigation police find multiple threatening phone messages and
texts from Matt Mathews on Mrs. Mathews’ cell phone. Police subpoena Mr. Mathews’ phone records as well.
Mr. Mathews is ultimately charged with the murder of his estranged wife Shannon.
24. At trial, the defense seeks to block the 911 call recording, in which Mr. Mathews’ statement can be clearly
heard, as hearsay. Is Mr. Matthews’ utterance on the 911 call hearsay that should be excluded?
a.
Yes, because it is offered as evidence of the truth of the matter asserted
b.
Yes, because the testimony violates the Confrontation Clause
c.
No, because it does not requires the fact finder to draw inferences
d.
No, because the 911 operator’s statements were intended to give police vital information
25. The defense also attempts to block the testimony of Mount Pilot police regarding Mr. Mathews utterances
during the recorded field sobriety test. Is this testimony hearsay?
a.
Yes, because it is offered as evidence of the truth of the matter asserted
b.
Yes, because the testimony violates the Confrontation Clause
c.
No, because it is an excited utterance
d.
No, because the officer is available for cross-examination
Case 8.3
Police investigate a reported sexual assault of a ten year old female. Police were alerted by a school nurse who
noticed bruises on her thighs after the child came to her office complaining of lower abdominal pain. The child
was interviewed by a sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE) who asked questions about the assault not to gather
evidence but to help the nurse examine and treat the child appropriately. The nurse also performed a rape kit
and collected samples for DNA analysis. The child identified a neighborhood handyman as the perpetrator.
The accused, Chester Mayhem, had recently worked on the victim’s home where he befriended the victim.
Mayhem reportedly had sexually assaulted the child on four separate occasions. The child was reluctant to
report the assaults as Mayhem threatened to kill her family if she said anything.
The subsequent investigation matched Mayhem’s DNA to three other unsolved sexual assault cases. Mayhems
is arrested and charged with multiple counts of aggravated sexual assault.
26. At trail the defense attempts to block the nurse’s testimony regarding the child’s description of the sexual
assault as hearsay. Is this it hearsay?
a.
Yes, because the nurse asked questions for the purposes of investigating the incident
b.
Yes, because the testimony violates the Confrontation Clause
c.
No, because testimony of a sexual assault nurse examiner is admissible under the medical diagnosis
exception
d.
No, because the child is too young to testify herself
Case 8.3
CEPC.GARD.16.8.4
27. The Supreme Court has ruled that for a child’s out-of-court statement to be admissible, the child’s
truthfulness must be “so clear from the surrounding circumstances that the test of cross-examination would be
of marginal utility. Which matters have been found to “properly relate to whether hearsay statements made by a
child witness in child sexual abuse cases are reliable?
a.
spontaneity and consistent repetition
b.
the child’s age
c.
whether the child is male or female
d.
the child’s race and ethnicity
b
Modern Hearsay Exceptions in Child Sexual Abuse Cases
CEPC.GARD.16.8.6
True / False
28. After Crawford v. Washington, the hearsay exceptions and exceptions to the Confrontation Clause are
identical with regard to testimonial evidence.
a.
True
b.
False
False
The Confrontation Clause After Crawford
CEPC.GARD.16.8.2
29. There are no exceptions to the hearsay rule in the Federal Rules of Evidence.
a.
True
b.
False
False
The Confrontation Clause After Crawford
CEPC.GARD.16.8.2
30. To qualify as an exception to the hearsay rule, the statement must have some indicia of reliability.
a.
True
b.
False
True
Hearsay and the Confrontation Clause
CEPC.GARD.16.8.1
31. Most jurisdictions and the federal government require a showing that the declarant is unavailable to trigger
at least some hearsay exceptions.
a.
True
b.
False
True
The Confrontation Clause After Crawford
CEPC.GARD.16.8.2
32. Most states, but not the Federal Rules of Evidence, recognize a hearsay exception for excited utterances.
a.
True
b.
False
False
CEPC.GARD.16.8.4
33. Although statements by a patient to a physician for treatment or diagnosis may be privileged, there is no
hearsay exception for such statements.
a.
True
b.
False
False
CEPC.GARD.16.8.2
34. There is a hearsay exception for learned treatises that are established, reliable sources.
a.
True
b.
False
True
CEPC.GARD.16.8.5
35. Some states still have a “fresh complaint” exception to the hearsay rule.
a.
True
b.
False
True
The Fresh Complaint and the Outcry Rule
CEPC.GARD.16.8.4
36. There were no rules about hearsay under the common law.
a.
True
b.
False
False
Hearsay and The Confrontation Clause
CEPC.GARD.16.8.1
37. The Confrontation Clause is found in the Fifth Amendment.
a.
True
b.
False
False
CEPC.GARD.16.8.1
38. The Confrontation Clause applies in civil cases.
a.
True
b.
False
False
Hearsay and the Confrontation Clause
CEPC.GARD.16.8.1
39. A defense witness states that he heard a person other than the defendant admit to the crime. This statement
could be admissible under the exception for statements against penal interest.
a.
True
b.
False
True
CEPC.GARD.16.8.4
40. The hearsay exception specifically for statements by child sexual abuse victims existed at common law.
a.
True
b.
False
False
Modern Hearsay Exceptions in Child Sexual Abuse Cases
CEPC.GARD.16.8.6
41. In Chambers v. Mississippi (1973), the Supreme Court held that a state may not use the hearsay rule to
deprive defendants in criminal cases of reliable and important evidence.
a.
True
b.
False
True
CEPC.GARD.16.8.4
42. Common law recognized the dying declarations exception to the hearsay rule.
a.
True
b.
False
True
CEPC.GARD.16.8.4
43. The dying declarations exception to the hearsay rule has been justified on the basis of public necessity.
statements against penal interest.
a.
True
b.
False
True
CEPC.GARD.16.8.4
44. Dying declarations may be excited utterances and thus potentially admissible under two exceptions to the
hearsay rule.
a.
True
b.
False
True
CEPC.GARD.16.8.4
45. The common law hearsay rule and exceptions to the hearsay rule were initially created to comply with
Confrontation Clause requirements.
a.
True
b.
False
False
Hearsay and the Confrontation Clause
CEPC.GARD.16.8.1
46. The Confrontation Clause requires that states create exceptions to the hearsay rule.
a.
True
b.
False
False
Hearsay and the Confrontation Clause
CEPC.GARD.16.8.1
47. Police interrogations can produce both testimonial and non-testimonial evidence.
a.
True
b.
False
True
The Confrontation Clause After Crawford
CEPC.GARD.16.8.3
Completion
48. In 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in _____ v. Washington made major changes in the law of hearsay
and the confrontation clause.
The Confrontation Clause After Crawford
CEPC.GARD.16.8.2
49. There is a hearsay exception for _____ utterances.
CEPC.GARD.16.8.4
50. Hearsay exceptions utilized by the government threaten values protected by the Sixth Amendment’s _____
Clause.
CEPC.GARD.16.8.1
51. There is a hearsay exception for regularly kept businesses _____.
52. Traditionally, hearsay exceptions have been allowed only when the statement has some indicia of _____.
53. There is a hearsay exception for dying _____.
54. Ohio v. Roberts is still apparently good law if the hearsay statement involved is not _____.
55. The _____ Rules of Evidence list multiple exceptions to the exclusionary rule.
56. There is a hearsay exception for statements about “_____” mental, emotional, or physical conditions.
57. Statements to physicians are an exception to the hearsay rule only if made by the patient for purposes of
treatment or _____.
58. The dying declarations exception requires that the declarant be dead or otherwise _____ at the time of trial.
59. To qualify for the hearsay exception for ancient documents, the document must be over _____ years old.
60. Modern _____exceptions occur frequently in child sexual abuse cases.
61. A person admitting the commission of a crime is making a statement against _____.
62. A long delay in reporting a sexual assault could be a factor considered by a jury in determining whether
there was _____to the sexual act.
63. Explain and discuss how Crawford v. Washington (2004) made major changes in the law. Explain why you
agree or disagree with the decision.
64. What are the concerns common to both the hearsay rule and the confrontation clause? Be sure to provide
examples.
65. Explain and discuss how exceptions to the hearsay rule endanger the Sixth Amendment right to
confrontation. Be sure to provide examples.
66. Hearsay rules have been relaxed for children for several purposes. Discuss the factors that relate to the
reliability of children’s statements. Do you believe there are victims, besides the children, because of the
exceptions in child abuse cases? Why or why not? What might be the pitfalls of this exception? (LO6, 205-206)
67. What is the primary purpose of Police Interrogation?
68. Describe the “Forfeiture by Wrongdoing” doctrine.
69. Discuss the issue of forensic analysts’ reports and expert opinions in relation to testimony being admissible
by analysts who did not actually conduct the laboratory analysis themselves. What do you see as possible
issues with this being permitted?
70. Describe the “Excited Utterance Exception” and the reason for the exception to non-testimonial evidence.