Class 17 FRE 803(6) - 803(8), 803(10), 805 7.32 Defendant is charged with conspiracy to murder and distribute heroin and crack cocaine. The prosecution alleges that Reyes is the head of a large drug ring, and used murder to eliminate rivals and competitors. The prosecution alleges that Reyes continued to head the drug ring even though he had been sent to prison on other charges. At the preliminary hearing, Vargas, a key prosecution witness, testified that he was a member of the drug ring, that he visited Reyes in prison, that Reyes gave him instructions to commit certain murders, and that he later carried out those instructions. The prosecution intends to introduce in evidence at trial the visitor's logbook from the prison where Reyes was incarcerated. Entries in the logbook show that Vargas had visits with Reyes close in time to the later killings. Defendant objects to the admission of the visitor's Logbook. Before trial a hearing is held to determine the admissibility of the logbook. McLear, the Inmate Records Coordinator at the prison, testifies at the hearing. McLear testifies that all visitors to the prison are required to present identification to the lobby officer and sign the visitor's logbook, and that the lobby officer is required to verify that the identification matches the signature. The following then happens:

Judge: Counsel, based on Ms. McLear's testimony, why doesn't the logbook qualify as a business record?

What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

7.37 This is a multiparty action involving claims of personal injury and wrongful death arising out of the crash of a Continental Airlines aircraft at Stapleton International Airport. The aircraft crashed on takeoff during a heavy snowstorm, killing 28 persons and injuring 54 others. The National Transportation Safety Board immediately began an investigation into the causes of the crash, and released its report several months later. The report includes data collected by investigators and through public hearings, and includes the analysis of various teams that looked at specific possibilities that may have caused the crash. The report concluded that pilot error and improper de-icing procedures caused the crash. The report also included a "Human Factors Report," which was based on interviews with various witnesses. This report concluded that the cockpit crew, especially the co-pilot in control of the aircraft, lacked experience flying in the weather conditions that existed that day.

Defendants object to the admissibility of any part of the NTSB crash report at trial. At a hearing on the motion, the following happens: Judge: Counsel, I'm particularly interested in why the NTSB report is not a public record properly admissible under Rule 803(8), and whether any other evidentiary rule governs the admissibility of the report. Since the presumption is that such public records are admissible, I'd like to hear from the defense first.

What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

Class 18 FRE 803(5), 807

10.12 The defendant is charged with bank fraud. He is a car dealer who uses floor plan financing. That is, he has an agreement with the bank under which he borrows money to buy cars from the manufacturer, and pays off the bank liens on each car when he sells the car. In that way, he can obtain bank financing of his inventory. The charge is that the defendant sold cars off the books and failed to pay off the bank liens as he sold the cars. The bank became suspicious that the defendant was not paying off the bank liens when cars were sold. It sent one its employees, Grover, to the defendant's lot after hours. He was instructed to record the make, model, and vehicle serial numbers of each car on the lot. The bank compared that list to the number of vehicles reported sold by the defendant. The bank then discovered there were 50 fewer cars on the defendant's lot than there should have been. The banks findings were turned over to the prosecutor's office, which then obtained an indictment against the defendant for bank fraud. The case is now on trial. In the prosecution's case-in-chief, the prosecutor seeks to offer evidence of the number of cars on the defendant's lot. During the direct examination of Grover, the following happens: Q. (By prosecutor) When you went to the defendant's lot, what did you do? A. I examined each car that was there and recorded each cars make, model, and identification number. Q. Do you have any present recollection of those makes, models, and identification numbers? A. I remember a few of the makes and models, but that's all. Q. I show you Prosecution Exhibit No. 5. What is it? A. That's the sheet of paper I used to write down the makes, models, and identification numbers of the cars on the lot.

Prosecutor: I now offer Prosecution Exhibit No. 5 in evidence and ask permission to show it to the jurors.

Defense: I object.

Judge: What are the grounds for your objection? What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

7.16

The defendant, Scrima, is charged with income tax evasion for the years [-5] through [-2]. The prosecution is attempting to prove its case using the net worth method, showing Scrima enjoyed increases in his net worth greater than could be explained by his reported income and any nontaxable source of funds. In his defense, Scrima claims that at the beginning of [-5] he possessed $375,000 in cash, which was more than sufficient to explain his increases in net worth from [-5] to [-2]. The case is now on trial. In the defense case-in-chief Scrima's business associate, Clayton, is called as a witness. During direct examination the following happens: Q. (By defense) Mr. Clayton, in the spring of [-5], were you considering a business venture with Scrima? A. Yes. Q. Did he discuss his resources with you? A. Yes. We talked at my office, just him and me. I asked him how much he had available. Q. What did he say? Prosecutor: I object. Judge: Counsel, come to the bench. [Lawyers approach.] What do you expect the witness to say? Defense: I expect him to say Scrima told him he had monies, at least $375,000, available in [-5] to get the business started up. Judge: Why would that be admissible? What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

Class 19 using FRE 804

7.26 The defendant is charged with armed robbery and assault. The charges are based on the victim being choked, beaten, and robbed at gunpoint by a group of men. After the robbery, the victim called the police, who drove him through the neighborhood in an attempt to find his assailants. The victim in fact recognized his attackers in a group of several men, and two men were arrested, based on the victim's identifications. The victim identified White as the man who choked him. Another person at the scene, Smith, was released when the victim failed to identify him as one of the robbers. One year after the robbery, but still before trial, Smith came forward and admitted his involvement in the crime. At the time Smith was in prison serving time for an aggravated assault that had occurred shortly before the present incident. Smith contacted the authorities, and gave both an oral and written statement. In his statements Smith admitted participating in the assault and robbery of the victim, but also stated that White had nothing to do with the incident and that Whites identification was a mistake. Smith said he was making the statement because White should not get in trouble for something he did not do. At trial, the defense called Smith as a witness, but Smith invokes his privilege against self-incrimination. The defendant then offers Smiths statements. The prosecution objects. Out of the jury's presence, the following happens: Judge: The state is objecting to the admission of Smiths statements made to the police. What's the basis? What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

7.53 This is a murder case. The defendant is accused of killing a rival gang member. Several witnesses were brought before the grand jury and testified. Two of the witnesses, Adams and Baker, are members of the victim's gang. Both testify that they saw the defendant shoot the victim in a vacant lot. Before trial the prosecution sends investigators to locate Adams and Baker, so that they can be subpoenaed for trial. The investigators find and serve Baker, but despite repeated efforts, are unable to find Adams. Before trial the prosecution moves to admit the transcript of Adams grand jury testimony. The defense objects. At a hearing on the motion, the following happens: Judge: Prosecution, on what grounds should I admit the transcript of Adams grand jury testimony? The case is now on trial. The prosecution calls Baker, who tells the judge he is not going to testify. Out of the jury's presence, the following happens: Q. (By judge) Mr. Baker, you're under oath. Why are you refusing to testify in this trial? A. I was told by friends of the defendant that the defendant put the word out, anyone who testifies in his trial is going to end up dead, and his family too. Q. Who told you that? A. Two gang members from the defendant's gang told me. Q. When and where was that? A. About a week ago, right on the street. Q. Mr. Baker, I'm ordering you to testify. If you refuse, I'll have to hold you in contempt and put you in the lockup. A. I'd rather be locked up than dead. I'm not talking. Judge: Bailiff, take Mr. Baker to the lockup. [Baker is taken from the courtroom.] Prosecutor: In light of Mr. Bakers refusal to testify, we offer the transcript of his grand jury testimony as an exhibit. Defense: I object. Judge: Basis? What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

Class 21 Use FRE 901-903

10.20 The defendant, Ernest Sidley, is charged with making false statements to a federal agency and obstruction of a federal investigation. At trial, the prosecution presented evidence that Sidley had fraudulently used Sid Gunther's name for a letter to the National Science Foundation recommending Sidley for an Outstanding Engineer award. Gunther denies sending or authorizing a letter to the NSF. He testifies that on February 24, [-2], he received an e-mail that urged him to tell the NSF that Sidley had permission to use his (Gunther's) name in the letter. Sidley denies sending the e-mail. During Gunther's direct examination the following happens: Q. (By prosecutor) Mr. Gunther, I show you Prosecution Exhibit 24 for identification. What is it? A. That's the e-mail I received. It has Ernest Sidley's e-mail address on it. Q. How do you know that is Sidley's e-mail address? A. He and I have exchanged e-mails in the past. I had his address on my reply function key, and it would automatically dial Sidley's e-mail address. I sent him an e-mail right away, telling him he most certainly could not say I had given him permission to use my name. Q. Did you ever speak to Sidley about the e-mail you received on February 24, [-2]? A. No, but on the day after I received this e-mail he called me and asked me to tell the NSF I had authorized the recommendation letter. Prosecutor: Your Honor, I offer Prosecution Exhibit 24 into evidence. Judge: Defense, any objection? Defense: Yes, Your Honor. Judge: Counsel, please approach. [Lawyers approach.] What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

Class 22 use FRE 1001-1004

10.18 This is a contract case. The plaintiff claims that he has the original of the contract executed by the parties. The defendant says he never signed that contract, and that his purported signature on the plaintiff's contract is a forgery. The defendant claims that he has an unsigned photocopy of the actual contract that the plaintiff and defendant executed. (The terms of the defendant's contract differ from plaintiff's contract.) The plaintiff denies he ever signed the original of the defendant's photocopy. The case is now on trial. The plaintiff is the first witness in the plaintiff's case-in-chief. During the direct examination, the following happens: Q. (By plaintiff) I'm showing you what has been marked Plaintiff=s Exhibit No. 1. Have you seen it before? A. Yes, that's the original contract. Q. Did you sign it? A. Yes, that's my signature here (pointing). Q. Did you see the defendant sign it? A. Yes, I was standing right next to him when he signed it. That's his signature here (pointing). Plaintiff: Your honor, we offer Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 1 in evidence. Defense: I object. Judge: Basis? The defendant is called as the first witness in the defendant's case-in-chief. During the direct examination, the following happens: Q. (By defense) I'm showing you what has been marked as Defendant's Exhibit No. 1. Have you seen it before? A. Yes. Q. Have you ever seen the original of this exhibit? A. Yes, I saw it when we signed it. Q. Where was that? A. It was at the plaintiff's office. The original and some copies were there. He and I signed the original, he kept the original, and he gave me one of the copies. Q. Have you seen the original since that day? A. No. I asked the plaintiff for it, but he claimed he didn't have it. Defense: Your honor, we offer Defendant=s Exhibit No. 1 in evidence. Judge: Any objection? Plaintiff: Yes, your honor. Judge: Basis? What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

Class 23 use FRE 602 & 701

4.14 The defendant is charged with conspiracy to sell cocaine and heroin. The case is now on trial. During its case-in-chief, the prosecution introduced in evidence tape recordings of conversations between the defendant and a government informant. That informant is then called as a witness. During the direct examination, the following occurs: Q. (By prosecutor) Mr. Leader, you've heard the tape recordings of your conversations with the defendant? A. Yes. Q. I want to ask you about some of the words you and the defendant were using during those conversations. When you use the word "batteries," what does that mean? A. Batteries means cocaine. Q. What does the word "butter" mean? Defendant: Objection, your honor. May we be heard at side bar? Judge: Yes. Approach the bench. [Lawyers approach.] Counsel, what's the basis for your objection? What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

4.14(b) The prosecution now calls a second witness to testify. This witness was a confidential informant for the government and has become someone the government relies on when they have general questions about drug operations in their jurisdiction. This witness is now called to testify: Q. (By prosecutor): Ms. Grant, were you able to listen to the tape recordings between the defendant and Mr. Leader? A. Yes Q: Do you have knowledge about the words that were used? A. Yes I do. Q: What do the words batteries and butter mean? Defendant: Objection your honor. What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.

Class 24 use FRE 702-706

9.16 Defendant is charged with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. The charges came about when police officers tried to pull over a car that had been reported stolen. The car sped away and the officers gave chase. When the car was finally pulled over, the driver and passenger tried to flee but were caught. When the defendant, who was the passenger, was stopped and searched, police found on him a loaded .38 caliber revolver, $353 cash including $52 in single bills, and a metal case containing 34 plastic bags of cocaine weighing a total of four grams. The case is now on trial. On direct examination one of the arresting officers testifies about his background as a police officer, his experience with narcotics crimes, the circumstances of the defendant's arrest, and what evidence he recovered from the defendant. The following then happens: Q. (By prosecutor) Officer Jones, based on your background and experience, do you have an opinion as to whether this type of 34 individually packaged bags of cocaine was for street-level distribution or for personal use, and if so, what do you base that opinion on? Defense: Objection, your honor. Judge: Please approach. [Lawyers approach the bench]. What's the officer going to say in answer to your two questions? Prosecutor: He's going to say that his opinion is that 34 bags of cocaine is for sale on the street. He's going to say that he bases this on the fact that the bags were individually wrapped dime bags, that the person had a gun, and that he had a large amount of cash, including $52 in single bills. Judge: Defense, what's the basis for your objection? What Objections and/or Rulings should be made in this case? Cite a Rule and how the rule is applied.