Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
21. The letter is
A plaintiff sued a defendant for an assault that occurred March 5 in California. To support his defense that he was in Utah on that date, the defendant identifies and seeks to introduce a letter he wrote to his sister a week before the assault in which he stated that he would see her in Utah on March 5.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
B is incorrect. Prior consistent statements cannot be used to support the testimony of the witness unless the witness testifies, and the prior consistent statement is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive. No such charge has been raised against the defendant, so the letter does not meet the requirements for the prior consistent statement exception.
C is incorrect. The letter is clearly evidence that has the tendency to make the existence of the defendant's intent to be in Utah on March 5th more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. As such, it is relevant, admissible evidence and should not be excluded as lacking in probative value.
D is incorrect. The letter is not a statement of belief, but rather a statement of the defendant's intent, and it is not being offered to prove the defendant went to Utah, but rather is admissible to show that the defendant intended to be in Utah on March 5.