Test Bank Answers The Hearsay Rule Chapter 11

CHAPTER 11 TEST BANK

MULTIPLE CHOICE

1. What holds that the state should gather and present as much live testimony as possible?

a. production theory

b. procedural rights theory

c. minimalist theory

d. centrality theory

2. The modern-day hearsay rule is supported by the

a. Fourth Amendment.

b. Fifth Amendment.

c. Sixth Amendment.

d. Seventh Amendment.

3. This entitles the accused to be present at trial and face adverse witnesses:

a. confrontation clause

b. due process clause

c. establishment clause

d. Santa clause

4. This entitles the defendant to be present and to cross-examine witnesses who testify but does not stop the prosecutor from offering testimonial accounts of what others said or from freely using prior statements by those who testify.

a. production theory

b. procedural rights theory

c. minimalist theory

d. centrality theory

5. Testimonial evidence is relevant only if the witness

a. accurately perceived the event he or she is testifying about.

b. now correctly recalls his or her perception.

c. now wishes to communicate his or her recollection accurately and honestly.

d. all of the above

6. When the declarant misspeaks or is misunderstood, it is a matter of

a. uncertainty.

b. faulty memory.

c. stuttering.

d. narrative ambiguity.

7. An example of an out-of-court notice is

a. illegally operative conduct.

b. iInitial statements.

c. effect on hearer.

d. the state of mind evidence.

8. A nonverbal act can be considered hearsay if it

a. is intended to disprove the matter asserted

b. has an unintentional effect

c. is intended to prove the matter asserted

d. is still an act

9. Out-of-court statements identifying a person after the declarant has identified the

person are prior

a. consistent statements.

b. statements of identification.

c. inconsistent statements.

d. written affidavits.

10. Admissions by conduct are

a. analogous to adoptive admissions.

b. an admission in writing.

c. nonverbal communication.

d. where not conduct but rather silence serves as an admission of guilt.

11. Statements by which of the following are exempt from the hearsay rule?

a. law enforcement personnel

b. judicial officers

c. attorneys

d. maids

12. Which of the following people uttered the original statement(s) governed by the hearsay rule?

a. witness

b. declarant

c. author

d. promoter

13. Which of the following constitutional amendments does hearsay often conflict with?

a. Fourth Amendment

b. Fifth Amendment

c. Sixth Amendment

d. Eighth Amendment

14. Which of the following legal theories requires a prosecutor to produce the declarant of hearsay?

a. minimalist theory

b. production theory

c. reliability theory

d. centrality theory

15. Which of the following legal theories states hearsay should be used only for corroboration or circumstantial proof of guilt?

a. minimalist theory

b. production theory

c. reliability theory

d. centrality theory

16. Which of the following legal theories states the prosecution should present as much live testimony as possible?

a. minimalist theory

b. reliability theory

c. centrality theory

d. procedural rights theory

17. Which of the following would be considered hearsay?

a. A witness testifies that an alleged kidnapper made a ransom demand.

b. A witness testifies that a mechanic told the driver of an automobile (who later was in an accident) that the automobile had worn-out brake pads that needed to be replaced.

c. A witness testifies that a defendant had previously admitted to being intoxicated contrarily to her testimony in court.

d. A witness testifies that a defendant had told the witness he intended to kill his wife.

18. The hearsay rule traces its origins to

a. common law.

b. Anglo-American evidence law.

c. English evidence law.

d. Roman evidence law.

19. In 1603, this individual was on trial for conspiracy to overthrow the King of England

a. Sir Robert Peel

b. Sir Walter Raleigh

c. Hans Gross

d. John Augustus

20. This rule states that the accused is entitled to be present at his or her trial and to see and hear the witnesses against him or her.

a. adoptive admissions

b. statement of co-conspirator

c. confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment

d. prior statement of identification

21. This theory entitles the defendant to be present and cross-examine witnesses who testify but does not stop the prosecutor from offering testimonial accounts of what other said or from freely using prior statements by those who do testify.

a. production theory

b. minimalist theory

c. reliability theory

d. procedural rights theory

22. This theory holds that the confrontation clause requires the prosecutor to produce the “speaker” at trial whenever possible.

a. confrontation theory

b. production theory

c. centrality theory

d. admission theory

23. This theory holds that hearsay is permissible as long as it is reliable.

a. reliability theory

b. procedural rights theory

c. minimalist theory

d. production theory

24. This theory states that hearsay should be permissible insofar as it corroborates or serves as circumstantial proof of guilt, but not as direct and critical evidence.

a. critical theory

b. prevention theory

c. testimonial theory

d. centrality theory

25. This theory holds that the state should gather and present as much live testimony as possible.

a. procedural rights theory

b. reliability theory

c. testimonial theory

d. evidence theory

26. Which one of the following is not a safeguard to ensure that only competent evidence is presented in court?

a. taking an oath so the witness feels compelled to tell the truth

b. subjecting witnesses to cross-examination so their perceptions, ability to recollect, and sincerity can be called into question by the opposition

c. applying stress to the subjecting witness to ascertain the complete truth

d. displaying the witness before the whole court so the judge and jury can observe the witness’s demeanor and behavior

27. In the case of Mueller and Kirkpatrick (1999), there were several reasons why courts typically frown on hearsay evidence. Which one of the following is not a reason?

a. misperception and misunderstanding

b. risk of uncertainty

c. narrative clarity

d. faulty memory

28. Two questions must be answered when determining whether a statement is offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. These questions should focus on the content of the statement and the __________ of the statement.

a. tone

b. purpose

c. history

d. perception

29. This out-of-court statement is not offered for the truth of the matter asserted when the (substantive) law makes uttering the statement a consequential fact.

a. legally operative conduct

b. effect on hearer

c. circumstantial evidence of declarant’s state of mind

d. prior statements

30. This out-of-court statement is not for the truth of the matter asserted (and therefore not hearsay) when it is offered to prove that it had an effect on the person who heard it.

a. prior statements

b. effect on hearer

c. legally operative conduct

d. circumstantial evidence of declarant’s state of mind

31. This evidence is seen when an in-court witness made an out-of-court statement not consistent with his or her in-court testimony.

a. effect on hearer

b. legally operative conduct

c. circumstantial evidence of declarant’s state of mind

d. prior statements

32. Saying, “Nice move!” to a person who trips is known as an

a. intentional, non-literal statement.

b. unintentional, non-literal statement.

c. intentional, literal statement.

d. unintentional, literal statement.

33. Saying, “It’s freezing in here!” when the heat is cut off in a home—a statement that is wholly subjective—is known as a(n)

a. intended assertion

b. truthful assertion

c. implicit assertion

d. implied assertion

34. In this court case, an eviction notice was sent to “Carolos Almaden” and concluded that this was not hearsay when it offered to prove that Almaden lived at the residence. This case clarifies what is considered hearsay and non-hearsay.

a. United States v. Singer

b. United States v. Ross

c. United States v. Simmons

d. United States v. Evans

35. If a witness makes an out-of-court statement that contradicts his or her in-court testimony, the out-of-court statement is not considered hearsay. This is known as a

a. prior consistent statement.

b. prior inconsistent statement.

c. prior statement of identification.

d. prior statement of misidentification.

36. These are out-of-court statements that are made identifying a person after the declarant has seen the person.

a. prior consistent statements

b. prior inconsistent statements

c. prior statements of identification

d. prior statements of misidentification

37. Which one of the following is not an admission by party opponents that is exempt from the hearsay rule?

a. the party’s own statements

b. an admission by a co-conspirator of the party

c. an admission by a person not authorized by a party to speak

d. the party’s admission by adoption or conduct

38. Assume that Shady is on trial for narcotics offenses. Officer Vigilant testifies that Shady fled from her when she attempted to effect an arrest. This is an example of an

a. admission by testimony.

b. adoptive admission.

c. admission by trial.

d. admission by conduct.

39. This is a type of hearsay exemption where silence, not conduct, serves as an admission of guilt.

a. admission by testimony

b. adoptive admission

c. admission by trial

d. admission by conduct

40. One significant exemption concerns Miranda. If police officers advise a suspect of her Miranda right to remain silent and she __________, then this cannot be admitted into evidence as an implied admission of guilt.

a. is mute

b. agrees

c. falls unconscious

d. calls for counsel

TRUE/FALSE

1. ____ The modern-day hearsay rule also finds support in the confrontation clause of the Fifth Amendment.

2. ____ Testimonial evidence is not relevant if the witness does not have the verbal skills to effectively narrate the events he or she is testifying about.

3. ____ Hearsay is typically frowned on by the courts because of the risk of uncertainty.

4. ____ A question that must be answered when determining whether a statement is offered into evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted is the origination of the statement.

5. ____ Legally operative conduct is a commonly recognized type of statement not offered for the truth of the matter asserted.

6. ____ Prior statements can also be offered but not for the truth of the matter asserted.

7. ____ Nonverbal statements are easy to distinguish between hearsay and non-hearsay.

8. ____ An out-of-court statement can be admitted over a hearsay objection if it is not hearsay.

9. ____ All prior statements are not considered hearsay.

10. ____ A prior statement of identification is exempt from the hearsay requirement.

11. ____ An admission by a co-conspirator of the party is an example of an admission by a party opponent.

12. ____ Admissions by conduct are similar to admissions by party opponents.

13. ____ Statements by a party’s butler would be exempt from the hearsay rule.

14. ____ Admissions by party opponents are not considered hearsay.

15. ____ Silence can serve as an admission of guilt under the category of admissions by conduct.

16. ____ Statements of prior identification are simply out-of-court statements identifying a person after the declarant has seen the person.

17. ____ Saying “Nice move!” to a person who trips is known as an intentional, literal statement.

18. ____ Hearsay is defined as an out-of-court statement, made by a speaker other than the in-court witness.

19. ____ Raleigh was on trial for conspiracy to overthrow the King of Scotland.

20. ____ The confrontation clause allows the accused is entitled to be present at his or her trial and to see and hear the witnesses against him or her.

21. ____ Pointer v. Texas (1965) was about testimony involving an armed robbery.

22. ____ One exception to the confrontation clause is that youthful victims of assault are allowed to testify through a closed circuit television.

23. ____ A court cannot permit a witness against a mob to conceal his or her identity out of the fear and risk of retaliation.

24. ____ The Douglas v. Alabama (1965) case concerned the use of an out-of-court statement about a confession.

25. ____ The confrontation clause does not require that the state produce the person whose out-of-court statement is introduced against the accused.

26. ____ Reliability theory holds that the confrontation clause requires the prosecutor to produce the “speaker” at trial whenever possible.

27. ____ The centrality theory is that hearsay should be permissible insofar as it corroborates or serves as circumstantial proof of guilt, but not as direct and critical evidence.

28. ____ The procedural rights theory holds that the state should gather and present as much live testimony as possible.

29. ____ In Crawford v. Washington (2004), the Supreme Court gravitated to a more liberal interpretation of the confrontation clause.

30. ____ One reason why witnesses take an oath before testimony is to make them feel compelled to tell the truth.

31. ____ One of the risks of hearsay is the misperception or misunderstanding of an event or events on behalf of the witness.

32. ____ It is impossible for an in-court witness to have a faulty memory.

33. ____ Two questions, the content and the purpose of the statement, must be answered when determining the truth of the matter asserted.

34. ____ According to FRE 801, a statement can be nonverbal conduct of a person if it is intended by the person as an assertion.

35. ____ If a witness makes an out-of-court statement that contradicts his or her in-court testimony, the out-of-court statement is not considered hearsay.

SHORT ANSWERS

1. Define hearsay.

2. What is the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment?

3. List the five theories concerning the relationship between hearsay and the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause as described by Mueller and Kirkpatrick (1999).

4. List and describe the safeguards that ensure that only competent evidence is presented in court.

5. What are four reasons why courts typically frown on hearsay evidence?

The first and most obvious reason for opposing hearsay is that the speaker may misperceive or misunderstand what was said out of court. The second reason is faulty memory. The third is the risk of uncertainty. Finally, hearsay introduces the potential for narrative ambiguity.