Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

TBLS">More Fun With TBLS

Here’s another sam­ple ques­tion from the Texas Board of Legal Specialization:

In fed­eral court, where a hearsay state­ment is admit­ted, the cred­i­bil­ity of the declar­ant may be attacked by:

a. Prior con­vic­tions, sub­ject to Rule 609;

b. Opin­ion and rep­u­ta­tion tes­ti­mony con­cern­ing the declarant’s truthfulness;

c. Prior incon­sis­tent statements;

d. Spe­cific instance of con­duct, if pro­ba­tive of truth­ful­ness or untruthfulness;

e. all of the above except d. 

The answer is found start­ing in Fed­eral Rule of Evi­dence 806:

When a hearsay state­ment — or a state­ment described in Rule 801(d)(2)(C), (D), or (E) — has been admit­ted in evi­dence, the declarant’s cred­i­bil­ity may be attacked, and then sup­ported, by any evi­dence that would be admis­si­ble for those pur­poses if the declar­ant had tes­ti­fied as a wit­ness. The court may admit evi­dence of the declarant’s incon­sis­tent state­ment or con­duct, regard­less of when it occurred or whether the declar­ant had an oppor­tu­nity to explain or deny it. If the party against whom the state­ment was admit­ted calls the declar­ant as a wit­ness, the party may exam­ine the declar­ant on the state­ment as if on cross-examination.

That is, the cred­i­bil­ity of the out-of-court declar­ant can be attacked with prior con­vic­tions (Rule 609), opin­ion and rep­u­ta­tion tes­ti­mony (Rule 608(a)), and prior incon­sis­tent state­ments (Rule 613), but not spe­cific instances of con­duct other than con­vic­tions (Rule 608(b)) unless the party against whom the state­ment calls the declar­ant as a wit­ness, in which case he may cross-examine the declar­ant about spe­cific instances of con­duct other than crim­i­nal convictions.

So the best answer is (e).

TBLS’s answer?:

c. Rule 806, Fed­eral Rules of Evi­dence, Note that Rule 608 would not apply because spe­cific instances of con­duct may not be proven by extrin­sic evidence. 

That one, I’m will­ing to attribute to a typo. Some­one typed “c” for “e.”

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

4 Responses to “More Fun With TBLS

  1. Brian Drake says:

    Recently I heard a lawyer talk­ing about being triple board cer­ti­fied, and it made me think of this:

    http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3rehmx/

  2. Alex Bunin says:

    Are you sure you want to take this test?

Leave a non-anonymous Reply