Habit and Custom Assignment Book : evidence for paralegals fifth edition Analyze and discuss each application question below: (Chapter 4 only) Hypothetical # 1 Consider the following hypothetical situation: Charlene was accused of welfare fraud. On her monthly statements to the Department of Social Services, she failed to report that she was working part time and earning income while receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) benefits. At trial, the social worker in charge of Charlene's case testified that she always advises AFDC recipients that they must report any and all earned income on their monthly statements, and that failure to do so is a crime. She testified that she works with a case load of approximately 800 recipients. On cross-examination, she testified that she could not specifically remember telling Charlene about her obligation to report income. 1. Under which Federal Rule of Evidence is the testimony of the custodian of records admissible? 2. Is the custodian's testimony conclusive proof that Charlene was advised of her obligation to report income? Discuss. Hypothetical # 2: Consider the following hypothetical situation: Dangerous Dan is arrested and charged with the crime of aggravated assault. He has two prior convictions for aggravated assault and there are several other incidents in Dan's past that were never charged, but would have been grounds for a charge of aggravated assault. 3. Is evidence of Dan's prior assaults, both charged and uncharged, admissible to prove the current charge of assault pursuant to Rule 406? Why or why not? 4. Consider the rules you have studied so far. Is there any other rule, under which you may be able to introduce evidence of Dan's prior assaults? Which rule(s) and under what conditions? Post Below - Labeling the Hypotheticals; repeating the question and numbering your responses