Search for: "Rules of Evidence v. Rules"
Results 941 - 960
of 59,608
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Mar 2020, 8:10 am
Specifically, the Court ruled... [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 6:08 am
Supreme Court recently clarified the rules regarding the admissibility of repressed memory evidence. [read post]
1 May 2009, 11:11 pm
In this case (Smith v. [read post]
14 Nov 2010, 9:33 pm
Commonwealth v. [read post]
11 Jun 2011, 1:47 pm
In a similar case in Circleville, Ohio, the judge recently ruled that evidence from the Intoxilyzer 8000 is not even reliable enough to be introduced as evidence at trial. [read post]
29 Jul 2017, 7:39 pm
In Stabler v. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 1:01 pm
In today’s case (Pausch v. [read post]
31 Dec 2010, 6:46 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for A statement that: (A) a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would have made only if the person believed it to be true because, when made,... [read post]
21 Aug 2011, 2:04 pm
North Carolina Rule of Evidence 607 provides that "The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling him. [read post]
9 May 2010, 10:09 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(6), the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine, provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for A statement offered against a party that has engaged or acquiesced in wrongdoing that was intended to, and did, procure the... [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 3:20 pm
Ohio Rule of Evidence 803(1) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for A statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter unless circumstances indicate lack... [read post]
18 Nov 2010, 1:57 pm
Like its federal counterpart, Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.803(4) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain, or sensations, or... [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 11:45 am
Like its federal counterpart, Indiana Rule of Evidence 803(4) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain, or sensations, or... [read post]
17 Aug 2012, 4:52 pm
Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(1) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for Testimony that: (A) was given as a witness at a trial, hearing, or lawful deposition, whether given during the current proceeding or a different one; and... [read post]
14 May 2011, 5:48 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for Records, reports, statements, or data compilations, in any form, of public offices or agencies, setting forth (A) the activities of the office or agency, or (B)... [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 5:30 am
Like its federal counterpart, Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.803(4) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain, or sensations, or... [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 1:48 pm
Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(1) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for Testimony given as a witness at another hearing of the same or a different proceeding, or in a deposition taken in compliance with law in the... [read post]
3 Feb 2014, 12:31 pm
Similar to its federal counterpart, Indiana Rule of Evidence 803(4) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for A statement that: (A) is made by a person seeking medical diagnosis or treatment; (B) is made for — and is... [read post]
25 Apr 2010, 7:06 am
Like its federal counterpart, Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.803(4) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain, or sensations, or... [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 7:27 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 106, the rule of completeness, provides that When a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part or... [read post]
