Question 23 (10 points)

Saved

Tony was arrested not far away from a burglarized building. The police issued him the Miranda warnings. Tony made no statements to the police. At trial, Tony testifies that he was near the burglarized building because he was there to help his friend with a flat tire and he did not commit the burglary. The prosecution intends to offer the arresting officer to testify that at the time of his arrest Tony did not tell the officer the story. Which one of the followings is correct?

Question 23 options:

	Tony's silence at the time of his arrest is admissible under the adoption-by-silence rationale.
	Tony's silence at the time of his arrest is not admissible under the adoption-by-silence rationale.

Question 24 (10 points)

Nancy and Debby were standing at the street corner. While Nancy was looking at a different direction, she heard Debby cry, "My God, that red car goes through a red light and hits another car!" The red car's driver is on trial for reckless driving. The prosecution asks Nancy to testify about Debby's statement.

Question 24 options:

	Nancy's testimony is not admissible because it is hearsay.
	Nancy's testimony is admissible because it is not hearsay.
	Nancy's testimony is hearsay but admissible under the state of mind exception.
	Nancy's testimony is hearsay but admissible under the exception of excited utterance.

Question 25 (10 points)

Jenny's kitchen window oversees the backdoor of a department store. One evening, Jenny was on the phone with her friend Alice. Jenny saw Peter, her neighbor, come out of the backdoor of the department store, holding a TV. Jenny said to Alice over the phone, "Look, I see Peter getting out of the store with a big TV." It turned out that Peter was stealing the TV. At Peter's trial, Jenny is not available to testify. The prosecution asks Alice to testify about Jenny's statement to her. The defense objects, claiming the testimony would be hearsay. The judge should rule that the testimony is ______________.

Question 25 options:

	inadmissible hearsay
	admissible as admission by party-opponent
	admissible under the exception of excited utterance
	admissible under the exception of present sense impression

Question 26 (10 points)

State v. Jones: The defendant, a state trooper, sexually assaulted a female motorist after stopping her for a traffic violation. The officer then took off in his patrol car in a high rate of speed without turning on the lights. The female motorist asked her boyfriend to chase the police car. Another police officer overheard from a citizen band radio the comments made by two truck drivers about the police car driving without its lights on and a small car chasing it. The court held that _______________.

Question 26 options:

	the police officer could not testify about the truck drivers' conversation because the testimony would be hearsay
	the police officer could testify about the conversation under the exception for admission by party-opponent
	the police officer could testify about the conversation under the exception for excited utterance
	the police officer could testify about the conversation under the exception for present sense impression

Question 27 (10 points)

Jason is charged with murder for killing Greg. The prosecution offers Marcos to testify that Jason stated to him: "Greg is the lowest scum of the earth. He owes me $1,000."

Question 27 options:

	Jason's statement is inadmissible hearsay.
	Jason's statement is inadmissible because it is irrelevant.
	Jason's statement is admissible because it is not hearsay. It is offered as circumstantial evidence to show his state of mind.
	Jason's statement is hearsay but admissible under the state of mind exception.

Question 28 (10 points)

Jason is charged with murder for killing Greg. The prosecution offers Marcos to testify that Jason stated to him "I'm going to kill Greg tonight."

Question 28 options:

	Jason's statement is inadmissible hearsay.
	Jason's statement is inadmissible because it is irrelevant.
	Jason's statement is admissible because it is not hearsay. It is offered as circumstantial evidence to show his state of mind.
	Jason's statement is hearsay but admissible under the state of mind exception.

Question 29 (10 points)

United States v. Pheaster: The defendants were convicted with a conspiracy to kidnap and hold Larry Adell for ransom. The prosecution's theory was that the defendant, Angelo, lured Larry to a parking lot by promising him a pound of marijuana. He then kidnapped Larry and demanded random from his family. Before heading for the parking lot, Larry told his friends that he was going to the parking lot to meet with Angelo to get a pound of marijuana. The defendant argued that Larry's friends' testimony about Larry's statement was inadmissible hearsay. The appellate court held that Larry's friends' testimony _______________.

Question 29 options:

	was admissible
	was not admissible

Question 30 (10 points)

Based on the reasoning of the court in Pheaster, determine which of the following statements is admissible under the state of mind exception.

Suppose Larry's statement was: "I am going to the parking lot to get a pound of grass."

The statement _____________ admissible.

Question 30 options:

	is
	is not

Question 31 (10 points)

Suppose Larry's statement is: "Angelo is going to the parking lot with a pound of grass."

The statement _____________ admissible.

Question 31 options:

	is
	is not

Question 32 (10 points)

Suppose Larry's statement is: "I am going to meet Angelo in the parking lot to get a pound of grass." His friends then saw him heading for the parking lot.

The statement ____________ admissible.

Question 32 options:

	is
	is not

Question 33 (10 points)

The court in Pheaster discussed Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Hillmon, a U.S. Supreme Court decision. The evidence law issue in the case was whether the letters written by Frederick Walters to his sister and fiance stating his intention to accompany a Mr. Hillmon to a campsite in Kansas was admissible to show that Walters had the intention of going and did go to the campsite. The Supreme Court held that the letters were ______________.

Question 33 options:

	admissible
	not admissible

Question 34 (10 points)

Alan is charged with murder for killing Amanda. Amanda went to a restaurant with Alan and she then disappeared. Alan denies that he was with Amanda. The prosecution calls Rose to testify that on the day of her disappearance Amanda stated to her, "I'm going to All-Star Restaurant to have dinner with Alan." Rose saw Amanda get into a taxi heading for the restaurant.

According to the Hillmon doctrine, Amanda's statement to Rose ___________ to show that she followed through with her intention and went to All-Start Restaurant.

Question 34 options:

	is admissible
	is not admissible

Question 35 (10 points)

Which one of the followings is correct regarding whether Amanda's statement is admissible to show Alan also went to the restaurant?

Question 35 options:

	Amanda's statement is not admissible for she could not state Alan's state of mind.
	Amanda's statement is not admissible for she could be mistaken about Alan's state of mind.
	Amanda's statement admissible for she was certain about Alan's state of mind.
	Amanda's statement is admissible for there was corroboration that she took steps to carry out what she stated she would do.

Question 36 (10 points)

Which one of the following statements is correct?

Question 36 options:

	The state of mind exception covers both statements of one's then existing state of mind and statements of memory.
	The state of mind exception covers only statements of one's then existing state of mind and it does not cover statements of memory.

Question 37 (10 points)

Dillon is charged with murder for killing Nolan. It is alleged that Dillon called Nolan out to the riverside and shot him. The prosecution asks Nolan's widow, Nancy, to testify. Nancy is to testify that on the day of murder Nolan received a phone call. After talking over the phone, Nolan said to her: "I'm going to the riverside. Dillon told me over the phone that I should go to the riverside." The defense objects to the testimony and claims that it is hearsay. If you were the judge, how should you rule?

Nancy's testimony: "Nolan said he was going to the riverside."

Question 37 options:

	admissible
	inadmissible

Question 38 (10 points)

Nancy's testimony: "Nolan said Dillon told him over the phone that he should go to the riverside."

Question 38 options:

	admissible
	inadmissible

Question 39 (10 points)

Keogh v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue: The defendant, a dealer working in a casino, was charged with tax evasion. The prosecution alleged that the defendant failed to report his tip income. The prosecution intended to offer into evidence of defendant's co-worker's diary as evidence. The diary contained information of the co-worker's tip income. Which one of the followings best describes the ruling of the court?

Question 39 options:

	The diary was inadmissible hearsay.
	The diary was inadmissible because it showed the co-worker's tip income not the defendant's tip income.
	The diary was admissible because it was not hearsay.
	The diary was hearsay but admissible under the business record exception.

Question 40 (10 points)

Gary, an organized crime figure, is charged with criminal extortion. Gary demanded protection money from local store owners. Bennie was a victim of Gary's extortion. Bennie kept a record as to how much protection money he paid to Gary in the past two years. The prosecution offers Bennie's record as evidence. The defense objects. Which one of the followings is correct?

Question 40 options:

	Bennie's record is admissible because it is not hearsay.
	Bennie's record is hearsay but admissible under the business record exception.
	Bennie's record is hearsay and is not admissible under the business record exception, for the record does not qualify as a business record.

Question 41 (10 points)

Marc was assaulted by Jose. He went to his doctor for treatment. He stated to his doctor: "I have a terrible headache. I was hit by a baseball bat on the head. Jose did it." Under the exception of statements for purposes of medical diagnosis and treatment, which one(s) of the followings is(are) admissible?

"I have a terrible headache."

Question 41 options:

	Admissible
	Inadmissible