Evidence Gathering & Case Preparation Flashcards

A statement describing an event, made by a declarant while perceiving it or immediately after, such as a 911 caller narrating a car leaving the scene, falls under which hearsay exception?

Answer: Present sense impression, FRE 803(1)

FRE 803(1) covers statements describing an event made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it.

Under the Driver's Privacy Protection Act, an investigator may obtain personal information from state motor vehicle records:

Answer: Only for a permissible use listed in the Act, such as use in connection with litigation

The DPPA (18 U.S.C. § 2721(b)) lists permissible uses, including use in civil or criminal proceedings and by licensed private investigators for a permitted purpose.

Within the federal criminal system, the Jencks Act requires the government to produce a prosecution witness's prior statements:

Answer: After the witness has testified on direct examination

The Jencks Act (18 U.S.C. § 3500) requires production of a government witness's relevant statements after that witness testifies on direct.

A party anticipates litigation and needs to preserve the testimony of an elderly, terminally ill witness before any suit is filed. Which federal rule provides a mechanism for this?

Answer: FRCP 27

FRCP 27 allows a petition to perpetuate testimony before an action is filed when the testimony might otherwise be lost.

A duplicate photocopy of a contract is generally admissible to the same extent as the original under FRE 1003 unless:

Answer: A genuine question is raised about the original's authenticity or admitting the duplicate would be unfair

FRE 1003 admits duplicates unless there is a genuine authenticity question or circumstances make admitting the duplicate unfair.

A litigation hold notice is most effective when it is:

Answer: Issued when litigation is reasonably anticipated, sent in writing to key custodians and IT, and periodically reissued

The duty to preserve begins when litigation is reasonably anticipated, and written, tracked, and periodically reissued holds reduce spoliation risk.

A prior inconsistent statement by a testifying witness is admissible as substantive evidence, not just for impeachment, under FRE 801(d)(1)(A) only if it was:

Answer: Given under penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, other proceeding, or deposition

FRE 801(d)(1)(A) treats a prior inconsistent statement as non-hearsay only if it was made under penalty of perjury in a formal proceeding or deposition.