Aquiring Admissable Statements Essay

1. When reviewing the legal requirements to acquire an admissible statement, what similarities did you find among the four states?In general the similarities among the four states pertain to the use of customary records such as religious ones, family history, documents more than 20 years old, recorded recollections, the absence of public records, vital statistics, statements about the declarants present sense impressions or the declarants the existing mental, physical or emotional state, statements about the persons medical condition. Arizona, Illinois and innovative York also allow telephone conversations to be admitted into read as long as one part has consented to such recording (Pilgrim Software, 2007).2. What differences did you find among the four states? California requires both parties consent to telephone conversation recording for the telephone call to be admitted as certainty (Pilgrim Software, 2007). California has admitted hearsay statements by victims who were murd ered, as demonstrated by the (Colb, 2008) Giles v. California.New York Evidence Law (2006) does non allow prior consistent statements. They can only be used to disprove misassigned motive, as demonstrated by People v. Seit, 86 N.Y.2d 92 (1995) (p. 15).However, New York has made exceptions to such statements when they apply to present impressions (p. 15). Out-of-court identifications made by persons not present is treated as hearsay (p. 15). This is also true for California (DiCarlo, 2001).In Arizona, former testimony in a non-criminal action or proceeding is admissible. If it relates to criminal actions or proceedings it is inadmissible (Arizona rules, 2009). Yet, Arizona allows firsthand create verbally accounts of the persons activities or routines (2009).Illinois (2011) contends that one must prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required, except as other provided in these rules or by statute in order to be admitted. If the original is unavailable, exceptions might be made (2011).3. What do you consider the most provoke concept regarding your comparison of admissible statements for these states?Perhaps, the most interesting concept regarding the comparison of admissible statements and hearsay exceptions for these states lie within the small and pivotal differences between them. well-nigh every difference is explained by a court case in that particular state. when one considers that each state has a few exceptions to the federal rules of evidence and hearsay, I cannot help but wonder whether such exceptions are constitutional.