Evidence - Carolina Academic Press

Evidence

capra et al 6e post qc proof update.indb 1 11/18/20 2:46 PM

Evidence

The Objection Method

sixth edition

Daniel J. CapraPhilip Reed Professor of Law, Fordham University School of Law

Stephen A. SaltzburgWallace and Beverley Woodbury University Professor

George Washington University Law School

Hon. Christine M. ArguelloUnited States District Court Judge, District of Colorado

Carolina Academic PressDurham, North Carolina


Copyright © 2021Carolina Academic Press, LLCAll Rights Reserved

ISBN 978-1-5310-2108-5eISBN 978-1-5310-2109-2LCCN 2020946261

Carolina Academic Press700 Kent StreetDurham, NC 27701Telephone (919) 489-7486Fax (919) 493-5668www . caplaw . com

Printed in the United States of Amer i ca


The authors dedicate this book to all our families and loved ones. Their patience, endurance, and endearments provide us monumental support.

D.J.C. to Anne, Emily, and David

S.A.S. to Susan, David, Diane, Lisa, and Mark

C.M.A. to my husband and soulmate Ron, who passed away in 2018


vii

Contents

Table of Cases xxixPreface to the Sixth Edition xlixIntroduction: The Restyled Rules of Evidence li

Chapter 1 · Mode and Order of Presenting Evidence 3A. Control by the Court 3

[1] Federal Rules of Evidence 102, 403, and 611(a) 3[2] An Application of Judicial Authority 4

United States v. Reaves 4Notes 6

B. Form of Questions to Witnesses 10[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 611(c) 10[2] Direct Examination 11

Straub v. Reading Co. 11Notes 13

[3] Cross- Examination 16United States v. McKenna 16Note 17

C. Scope of Cross- Examination 18[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 611(b) 18[2] The American Rule: Cross- Examination Within

the Subject Matter of the Direct 18Macaulay v. Anas 18Note 21

Chapter 2 · Objections and Offers of Proof 23A. Introduction 23

[1] Illustration 23[2] Federal Rule of Evidence 103 24

B. Contemporaneous Objection 25United States v. Spriggs 25Notes 26

C. Requirement of Specific Objection 32United States v. Wilson 32Note 34

D. Harmless Error and Plain Error 35[1] The Standards of Review 35


viii CONTENTS

[2] Application of the Harmless Error Standard 35[3] Application of the Plain Error Standard 37[4] Distinguishing “Forfeiture” of Claim of Error

from “Waiver” of the Claim 37E. Offer of Proof 38

United States v. Winkle 38Notes 40

Chapter 3 · Competency 43A. Introduction 43B. Status 43

[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 601 43[2] Competency vs. Credibility 44

United States v. Bedonie 44Notes 45

[3] Jurors 47[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 606 47[b] The “No- Impeachment” Rule and its Exceptions 48Pena- Rodriguez v. Colorado 48Notes 63

[4] Judges 67[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 605 67[b] Advisory Committee’s Note to Rule 605 67Advisory Committee’s Note 67Notes 68

C. Foundational Competence 69[1] The Oath 69

[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 603 69[b] Religious Convictions 70

[i] Illustration 70[ii] Substitutes for the Oath 70

Ferguson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue 70Notes 72

[2] Youth 73United States v. Allen J. 74Notes 77

[3] Mental Impairment 78United States v. Phibbs 78Notes 80

[4] Perception 80[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 602 80[b] Illustration 81[c] Minimal Standard 81


CONTENTS ix

United States v. Proano 81Notes 82

[5] Recollection 85[a] Memory Refreshed 85

[i] Illustration 85[ii] Federal Rule of Evidence 612 85

Note 86[iii] Any Statement or Object 87

Baker v. State 87Notes 90[b] Hypnotically Refreshed Memory 93 People v. Zayas 93Notes 96

[6] Communication 97[a] Illustration 97[b] Interpreters 98Watson v. State 98Notes 101

Chapter 4 · Relevance 103A. Introduction 103

[1] Federal Rules of Evidence 401, 402, and 403 103Notes 103

B. Any Tendency 105United States v. Foster 105Notes 107

C. Fact of Consequence 110D. Sources of Authority for Excluding Relevant Evidence 111

United States v. Lowery 111E. Rule 403 Balancing and the Meaning of “Unfair Prejudice” 113

McQueeney v. Wilmington Trust Co. 113United States v. McGregor 116Notes 120

F. Common Applications of the Rule 403 Balancing Test 124[1] Consciousness of Guilt 124

[a] Illustration 124[b] Flight and Escape 124United States v. Hankins 124Notes 127

[2] Expressive Material 128 People of the Territory of Guam v. Shymanovitz 128United States v. Gamory 135


x CONTENTS

[3] Similar Occurrences 137Nachtsheim v. Beech Aircraft Corp. 137Notes 143

[4] Gruesome Visual Pre sen ta tions 146Terry v. State 146Notes 147

[5] Implicating Another 148[a] Alternative Perpetrator Evidence 148United States v. McVeigh 148[b] Alternative Perpetrator Evidence and the Constitutional

Right to an Effective Defense 155Holmes v. South Carolina 155

G. Evidentiary Alternatives and Stipulations 160Old Chief v. United States 160Notes 167

Chapter 5 · Relevance — Special Rules 173A. Subsequent Remedial Mea sures 173

[1] Federal Rule 407 173[2] Committee Note to 1997 Amendment to Rule 407

[edited to apply to the rule as restyled in 2011] 173[3] Illustration 174[4] Product Liability, Feasibility and Control 174

Cameron v. Otto Bock Orthopedic Industry, Inc. 174Notes 176

B. Compromise and Offer of Compromise 183[1] Federal Rule 408 183[2] Committee Note to 2006 Amendment to Rule 408

[edited to comport with restyling of text in 2011] 184[3] Illustration 186[4] Disputes, Waiver and Other Purposes 187

Alpex Computer Corp. v. Nintendo Co., Ltd. 187Notes 190

C. Payment of Medical or Similar Expenses 192[1] Federal Rule 409 192[2] Illustration 193[3] Admission of Fault 193

Galarnyk v. Hostmark Management, Inc. 193Note 194

D. Pleas and Discussions 194[1] Federal Rule 410 194[2] Illustration 195


CONTENTS xi

[3] Coverage of the Rule 196[a] Statements to Prosecutor 196United States v. Bauzó- Santiago 196[b] Impeachment 200United States v. Udeagu 200Notes 201

[4] Can the Protection be Waived? 203United States v. Mezzanatto 203Note 209

E. Liability Insurance 210[1] Federal Rule 411 210[2] Illustration 210[3] Permissible Uses of Liability Insurance 211

Bernier v. Board of County Road Commissioners 211Notes 212

Chapter 6 · Character Evidence, Prior Bad Acts, and Habit 213A. Introduction 213B. Federal Rules 404, 405, 406 216C. The 11 Rules of Substantive Character Evidence, Similar Acts and Habit 217

Rule # 1 217[1] Illustration 217[2] General Rule 218

Ginter v. Northwestern Mutual Life Ins. Co. 218Rule # 2 220[1] Character in Issue 220

Schafer v. Time, Inc. 220[2] Illustration 222Rule # 3 223

United States v. Williams 223Note 225

Rule # 4 226Michelson v. United States 226Notes 230

Rule # 5 232United States v. Keiser 232Notes 235

Rule # 6 236Questions 236

Rule # 7 236Rule # 8 237

United States v. Bruguier 237Notes 240


xii CONTENTS

Rule # 9 243[1] Federal Rule 404(b) 243[2] General Princi ples; The Requirement of Probative Value

for a Non- Character Purpose 243United States v. Gomez 243

[3] The 2020 Amendment to Rule 404(b) 249[4] Non- Character Purposes: Plan; Identity 250

United States v. Carroll 250Note 253

[5] Non- Character Purposes: Motive 254United States v. Potter 254Notes 255

[6] Non- Character Purposes: Mental State (Intent, Knowledge, etc.) 257United States v. Hearst 257[a] Intent in Drug Cases: The Automatic View 259United States v. Smith 259[b] Intent in Drug Cases: Requiring an Active Dispute on

Intent Before Prior Acts May Be Admitted 261United States v. Miller 261[c] Knowledge — And a Focus on Whether Knowledge

Is Actively Disputed 267United States v. Caldwell 267United States v. Martinez 276Note 279

[7] Absence of Mistake (and the Doctrine of Chances) 280United States v. Henthorn 280

[8] Other Not- For- Character Uses for Uncharged Acts of Misconduct 288United States v. Reme 288

[9] Standard of Proof for Acts of Uncharged Misconduct 290Huddleston v. United States 290Notes 293

[10] Procedural Issues Raised by Rule 404(b) 296[a] Acts That Are Inextricably Intertwined with

the Crime Charged 296[b] “Reverse” 404(b) Evidence 299[c] Applicability of Rule 403 299[d] Rule 404(b) and Civil Cases 300[e] The Notice Requirement 301

Rule # 10 302[1] Introduction 302[2] Federal Rule 406 303[3] The Line Between Habit and Character 303

United States v. Angwin 303Notes 306


CONTENTS xiii

[4] Proof of Habit 308Perrin v. Anderson 308Note 310

Rule # 11 311[1] Federal Rule 412 311[2] Civil Cases 312

Judd v. Rodman 312Note 314

[3] Rape Shield Protection and the Criminal Defendant’s Constitutional Rights 315United States v. Bear Stops 315Question 321Notes 321

[4] Federal Rules 413, 414, 415 323[a] The Congressional Enactments 323[b] Scope of the Rules Permitting Use of the Defendant’s

Prior Sex Offenses 325[c] Constitutional Challenges and the Applicability of Rule 403

to Uncharged Acts of Sexual Misconduct 326United States v. Lemay 326Note 332

Chapter 7 · Authenticating Evidence 335A. Basic Princi ples 335

[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 901 335[2] Illustration 336[3] Chain of Custody 337

Lockhart v. McCotter 337Notes 338

[4] Evidence of Tampering 341United States v. Edwards 341

[5] The Requirement of Admissible Evidence for Foundation 345United States v. Bonds 345Note 349

B. Examples of Authentication: Illustrative Evidence 349Carson v. Polley 349

C. Examples of Authentication: Photo graphs, Videotapes, and Recordings 353[1] Illustration 353[2] Basic Foundation 354

United States v. Gray 354Notes 355

D. Examples of Authentication: Voice Identification and Phone Calls 357[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 901(b)(4)–(6) 357[2] Advisory Committee’s Note to Rule 901 358


xiv CONTENTS

[3] Voice Identification 358[a] Illustration 358[b] Identification at Any Time 359United States v. Watson 359Note 360

[4] Incoming Telephone Calls 361[a] Illustration 361[b] Circumstances of the Statements 361United States v. Parker 361

[5] Out going Telephone Calls 363[a] Illustration 363[b] Self- Identification; Circumstantial Evidence 363United States v. Kingston 363Note 364

E. Handwriting and Writings 365[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 901(b)(2)–(4) 365[2] Handwriting 365

[a] Illustration 365[b] Extent and Timing of Perception 366United States v. Scott 366

[3] Comparisons by the Jury 368[a] Illustration 368[b] Expert Examination Not Required 368United States v. Saadey 368Note 369

[4] Circumstantial Evidence 370United States v. McMahon 370Note 372

F. Public Rec ords 373[1] Federal Rules of Evidence 901 and 902 373

G. Business Rec ords 374[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 902 (11) and (12) 374[2] Committee Note to 2000 Amendment to Rule 902 374

Note 375H. Authentication of Electronic Evidence 376

[1] e- Mail 376United States v. Safavian 376Note 381

[2] Text Messages 385State of Arizona v. Damper 386Commentary on Authenticating Text Messages 387

[3] Web Pages 388Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite Corporation 388Commentary on Authenticating Web Pages 389


CONTENTS xv

[4] Social Media Postings — Facebook, Twitter, etc. 391United States v. Vayner 391Commentary on Authenticating Social Media Postings 396

[5] Chatroom and Other Social Media Conversations 397United States v. Tank 397Commentary on Authenticating Chatroom and Other

Social Media Conversations 399[6] Authenticating Electronic Evidence by Certificate Instead

of In- Court Testimony: Rules 902(13) and (14) 400

Chapter 8 · Best Evidence Rule 407A. Definition 407

[1] Federal Rules of Evidence 1001–1008 407[2] Illustration 409

B. General Rule — Proving the Contents of a Writing or Recording 409[1] Proving the Contents of a Writing 409

DeMarco v. Ohio Decorative Products, Inc. 409Notes 410

[2] Writings Defined 412Seiler v. Lucasfilm, Ltd. 412

[3] Physical Evidence 416United States v. Buchanan 416

[4] Tape Recordings 418United States v. Howard 418Note 419

C. Duplicates and Secondary Evidence 420[1] Duplicates 420

Railroad Management Com pany LLC v. CFS Louisiana Midstream Co. 420

Notes 421[2] Secondary Evidence 422

Neville Construction Co. v. Cook Paint and Varnish 422Notes 423

D. Application of Best Evidence Rule to Electronic Evidence 424United States v. Bennett 424United States v. Diaz- Lopez 427Vagenos v. LDG Financial Ser vices, LLC 429

E. Summaries 431United States v. Appolon 431Notes 433

Chapter 9 · Opinion Testimony 437A. Lay Opinions 437

[1] Illustration 437[2] Federal Rules of Evidence 701 and 704 438


xvi CONTENTS

[3] Rationally Based on Perception 439United States v. Hoffner 439United States v. Meises 440Note 443

[4] Helpful to the Jury 444[a] Short- Hand Rendition 444United States v. Yazzie 444Note 446[b] Lay Witness with the Same (or Less) Information

Than the Factfinder 448United States v. Diaz 448Notes 451[c] Ultimate Issue 452Kostelecky v. NL Acme Tool/NL Industries, Inc. 452Notes 453

[5] The Line Between Lay and Expert Testimony 455[a] Lay Witnesses Giving Expert Testimony 455United States v. Figueroa- Lopez 455[b] Advisory Committee Note to 2000 Amendment to Rule 701 459[c] Comment by Reporter on 2000 Amendment to Rule 701 460[d] Post-2000 Amendment Case Law 462United States v. Perkins 462United States v. Habibi 466

B. Experts 467[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 702 467[2] Qualification of Experts 468

Berry v. City of Detroit 468Notes 471

[3] Proper Subject Matter for Expert Testimony 473Scott v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 473Notes 475Nimely v. City of New York 477

[4] The Requirement that Expert Testimony be Reliable 482[a] Scientific Expert Testimony — The General Ac cep tance Test 482Frye v. United States 482[b] Scientific Expert Testimony — The Reliability Test and

the Trial Court’s Gatekeeping Function 483Daubert v. Merrell Dow Phar ma ceu ti cals, Inc. 483[c] Applications of the Daubert Gatekeeping Function

to Scientific Expert Testimony 489General Electric Co. v. Joiner 489Notes 495Westberry v. Gislaved Bummi AB 499


CONTENTS xvii

[d] Applications of the Daubert Gatekeeping Function to Evidence in Electronic Form 504

In re Three Mile Island Litigation 504United States v. Quinn 507Comment on Electronic Evidence as Regulated by Daubert 508[e] Applications of the Daubert Gatekeeping Function

to Non- Scientific Expert Testimony 509Kumho Tire Com pany, Ltd. v. Carmichael 509[f] The 2000 Amendment to Federal Rule 702 (as restyled in 2011) 517[g] Cases De cided Under the 2000 Amendment to Rule 702 524[h] Daubert and Forensic Testimony 528United States v. Baines 529United States v. Glynn 538Notes 543[i] A Specialized Application of Reliability Standards:

Proof of Probability 549 People v. Collins 549Notes 554

[5] Basis of Opinion and Under lying Data 556[a] Federal Rules of Evidence 703 and 705 556[b] The 2000 Amendment to Rule 703 — Committee Note

and Reporter’s Observations 556[c] Facts Reasonably Relied Upon 560Crowe v. Marchand 560Alfa Corporation v. Oao Alfa Bank and Alfa Capital

Markets (USA), Inc. 563Notes 566

[6] Ultimate Issue 567[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 704 567[b] Use of Terminology with Both Legal

and Colloquial Connotations 568United States v. Perkins 568Note 570[c] Mental State of a Criminal Defendant 571United States v. Thigpen 571Notes 572

Chapter 10 · Hearsay Defined 575A. Federal Rules of Evidence 801 and 802 575B. Truth of the Matter Asserted 575

[1] Illustrations 575[2] In de pen dent Legal Significance 576

[a] Oral Contracts 576


xviii CONTENTS

Creaghe v. Iowa Home Mutual Casualty Co. 576Note 578[b] Threats 578United States v. Jones 578

[3] Statement Offered to Prove It Was False 579United States v. Young 579Note 581

[4] Notice — Statement Offered for its Effect on the Listener 582Vinyard v. Vinyard Funeral Home, Inc. 582Note 583McClure v. State 583Note 584

[5] Other Not- for- Truth Purposes 587United States v. Wicks 587Notes 588

C. Statement 590[1] Assertive Conduct 590

[a] Illustration 590[b] Act of Production 591Stevenson v. Commonwealth 591Notes 592

[2] Non- Assertive Conduct and Words 593[a] Illustrations 593[b] Implied Assertions 594United States v. Zenni 594Note 596

[3] Electronic Information 601United States v. Wallace 601Note 602

D. Prior Statements of Testifying Witnesses 603United States v. Check 603Note 606

Chapter 11 · Hearsay Exclusions 609A. Statements That Are “Not Hearsay” Under Federal Rule 801(d) 609B. Hearsay Exclusions for Certain Prior Statements by a Testifying Witness 610

[1] Inconsistent Statements Under Oath 610[a] Common Law 610[b] Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(A) 611[c] Illustrations 611[d] Other Proceeding 612United States v. Livingston 612Notes 615


CONTENTS xix

[2] Consistent Statements 617[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) 617[b] Illustration 617[c] Rehabilitation After Allegations of Recent Fabrication or

Improper Motive 618Note on Tome v. United States 618Notes on Admitting Prior Consistent Statements to Rebut

a Charge of Recent Fabrication or Improper Motive 620[d] Rehabilitation on Other Grounds 621

[3] Prior Identifications 624[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(C) 624[b] Illustration 624[c] Subject to Cross- Examination 625United States v. Owens 625Notes 629

C. Statements of a Party- Opponent 630[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2) 630[2] Own Statement 631

State v. Johnson 632Notes 633

[3] Statements Adopted by the Party- Opponent 637[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(B) 637[b] By Conduct or Silence 637Carr v. Deeds 637United States v. Hoosier 639[c] Adoption of Electronic Communications 640United States v. Johnson 640Notes 644

[4] Authorized- Agent Statements and Statements by Agents About Matters Within the Scope of Their Authority 645[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(C), (D) 645[b] Applying the Rules on Party- Opponent Statements,

Statements by Agents Authorized to Speak, and Statement by Agents About Matters Within the Scope of Their Authority 646

Mahlandt v. Wild Canid Survival & Research Center, Inc. 646Notes 649[c] Within the Scope of the Agency or Employment 650Hill v. Spiegel, Inc. 650Notes 651

[5] Co- Conspirators 656[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E) 656[b] Existence of Conspiracy 656


xx CONTENTS

Bourjaily v. United States 656Notes 661[c] During the Course and In Furtherance of the Conspiracy 664United States v. Ciresi 664Notes 670

Chapter 12 · Hearsay Exceptions Dependent on the Unavailability of the Declarant 673

A. Introduction 673B. Unavailability Defined 673

[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(a) 673[2] Privilege 674

[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(a)(1) 674[b] Illustration 674[c] Burden of Proof 674United States v. Pelton & Rich 674Notes 676

[3] Refusal 677[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(a)(2) 677[b] Illustration 677Note 677

[4] Lack of Memory 678[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(a)(3) 678[b] Illustration 678[c] Permanent Loss 679United States v. Amaya 679Note 680

[5] Death or Disability 680[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(a)(4) 680[b] Illustration 680[c] Temporary Disability 681United States v. Faison 681Note on Remote Testimony and Infirm Witnesses 683

[6] Absence 683[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(a)(5) 683Note 684

[7] Procurement or Wrongdoing 684[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(a) 684[b] Negligence 685United States v. Mathis 685

C. Unavailability Exceptions 685[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b) 685[2] Former Testimony 686

[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(1) 686


CONTENTS xxi

[b] Pre de ces sor in Interest and Similarity of Motive 687In the Matter of Johns- Manville/Asbestosis Cases 687Notes 689

[3] Dying Declarations 694[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(2) 694[b] Declarant’s Belief in Imminent Death 695Woods v. Cook 695Notes 698

[4] Statement Against Interest 700[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3) 700[b] Penal Interest 700Williamson v. United States 700United States v. Paguio 705United States v. Rosario- Pérez 709Notes 711[c] Civil Cases 717Linde v. Arab Bank PLC 717

[5] Family History 720[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(4) 720

[6] Forfeiture by Wrongdoing 721[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(6) 721[b] Standards for Finding Forfeiture by Wrongdoing 721United States v. Dinkins 721Notes 726

Chapter 13 · Hearsay Exceptions Not Requiring Declarant Unavailability 727A. Pre sent Sense Impression 727

[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803(1) 727[2] Illustration 727[3] Event, Perception, and Time Requirements 728

United States v. Polidore 728Notes 730

B. Excited Utterances 735[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803(2) 735[2] Illustration 736[3] Under the Influence of the Startling Event 737

United States v. Marrowbone 737United States v. Boyce 738United States v. Bates 743Notes 745

C. Statement of Existing Mental, Emotional or Physical Condition 750[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803(3) 750[2] Illustration 750[3] Statements Offered to Prove Conduct 751


xxii CONTENTS

Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York v. Hillmon 751Notes 755

[4] Past Acts 758Shepard v. United States 758Note 762

D. Statement for Treatment or Diagnosis 763[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803(4) 763[2] Illustration 764[3] Causation 765

Rock v. Huffco Gas & Oil Co. 765Notes 768

E. Past Recollection Recorded 771[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803(5) 771[2] Illustration 772[3] Lack of Recollection; Adopted Statement 772

United States v. Williams 772Notes 777

F. Hearsay Within Hearsay 778[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 805 778[2] Illustration 778[3] The Non- Hearsay Prob lem 779

United States v. Dotson 779Note 780

G. Business Rec ords Exception 781[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6) 781[2] Illustration 781[3] Regular Recording of Regularly Conducted Activity;

Proper Foundation 782United States v. Towns 782Note 785

[4] Trustworthiness: Recording Information from Other Sources 787United States v. Vigneau 787Notes 790

[5] Trustworthiness; Rec ords Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation 793Palmer v. Hoffman 793Notes 794

[6] Electronic Rec ords 796[7] Proof of Absence of Business Rec ords 798

H. Public Rec ords 798[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8) 798[2] Illustration 799[3] Opinions and Factual Findings 799

Beech Aircraft Corp. v. Rainey 799Notes 804


CONTENTS xxiii

I. Ancient Documents 813[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803(16) 813[2] Advisory Committee Note to the 2017 Amendment to Rule 803(16) 814

Committee Note 814[3] Commentary on the Ancient Documents Exception, Electronically

Stored Information, and the 2017 Amendment to Rule 803(16) 815J. Learned Treatise 818

[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803(18) 818[2] Illustration 818[3] Foundation Requirements 819

United States v. Norman 819Note 820

Chapter 14 · Residual Exception to the Hearsay Rule 821A. Introduction 821B. Residual Exception 821

[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 807 821[2] Advisory Committee Note to the 2019 Amendment to Rule 807 822[3] Analy sis of the Residual Exception 824[4] Relationship to Other Exceptions 827[5] Trustworthiness; More Probative Than Any Other

Evidence Reasonably Available; and Notice 829Larez v. City of Los Angeles 829United States v. Burdulis 832Notes 834

Chapter 15 · The Confrontation Clause 843A. Confrontation Clause 843B. The Confrontation Clause and Admission of Out of Court Declarations 843C. The Confrontation Clause as a Regulator of “Testimonial” Hearsay 844

Crawford v. Washington 844Notes 857

D. Post- Crawford Attempts to Define Which Hearsay Statements Are “Testimonial” 859[1] The Primary Motivation Test 859

Michigan v. Bryant 859[2] Statements by Children and Reporting Obligations 870

Ohio v. Clark 870[3] Laboratory Reports Prepared for Trial 876

Melendez- Diaz v. Mas sa chu setts 876E. Expert’s Reliance on Testimonial Hearsay 890

A Note on Williams v. Illinois 890The Dispute in Williams Over the Definition of “Testimonial” 893

F. Forfeiture of the Right to Confrontation 894


xxiv CONTENTS

G. The Bruton Issues 897Richardson v. Marsh 897Gray v. Mary land 902Notes 907

H. The Right to Face- to- Face Confrontation 909Mary land v. Craig 911Notes 919

Chapter 16 · Shortcuts to Proof: Judicial Notice and Presumptions 923A. Judicial Notice 923

[1] An Overview 923[2] Federal Rule of Evidence 201 923[3] Generally Known Facts 924

Varcoe v. Lee 924Notes 927

[4] Judicial Notice in Criminal Cases — Instructing the Jury 928United States v. Bello 928Note 931

[5] Legislative Facts 932[a] Advisory Committee’s Note 932Advisory Committee’s Note to Rule 201 932[b] Adjudicative vs. Legislative Facts 933United States v. Gould 933Notes 936

B. Presumptions 938[1] An Overview 938[2] Federal Rules of Evidence 301 and 302 938[3] The Basic Choice: To Shift the Burden of Persuasion or

Not in Civil Cases? 939McCann v. The George W. Newman Irrevocable Trust 939Notes 942

[4] Presumptions in Criminal Cases 943County Court of Ulster v. Allen 943Notes 946

Chapter 17 · Impeachment 949A. Introduction 949B. Impeaching Your Own Witness: The Vouching Rule and Its Rejection

by the Federal Rules of Evidence 950[1] The Vouching Rule at Common Law 950[2] Illustration 950[3] Federal Rule of Evidence 607 951

Notes 951C. Types of Impeachment 954

[1] Capacity 954


CONTENTS xxv

MODE 1: Religious Belief 954[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 610 954[b] Beliefs Impairing Credibility: General Rule of Exclusion 955United States v. Sampol 955Note 955MODE 2: Perception 956MODE 3: Memory 957MODE 4: Communication 959Notes 959

[2] Impeachment of a Witness’s Character for Truthfulness 960MODE 5: Convictions/Prior Crimes 961[a] Illustration 961[b] Federal Rule of Evidence 609 961[c] Automatic Admissibility of Convictions for Crimes That

Involve a Dishonest Act or False Statement, and Balancing for Those That Do Not 963

United States v. Hayes 963United States v. Brackeen 965United States v. Caldwell 967United States v. Shelledy 970Notes 972MODE 6: Bad Acts 983[a] Common Law 983[b] Illustration 983[c] Federal Rule of Evidence 608(b) 984[d] Advisory Committee Note to 2003 Amendment to Rule 608(b) 985[e] Balancing Probative Value and Prejudicial Effect, and the

Prohibition on Extrinsic Evidence of Untruthfulness 986Simmons, Inc. v. Pinkerton’s, Inc. 986Notes 988MODE 7: Character Witness for Veracity/Untruthfulness 993[a] Common Law 993[b] Federal Rule of Evidence 608(a) 994[c] Expert Testimony as to Truthfulness 994United States v. Barnard 994

[3] Level Three — Inconsistencies 995MODE 8: Prior Inconsistent Statements 995[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 613 995[b] General Requirements; Inconsistency 996United States v. Rogers 996Note 1000[c] Illustrations 1001MODE 9: Contradiction 1002[a] Illustration 1002


xxvi CONTENTS

[b] Overview 1002[c] Extrinsic Evidence to Contradict 1003[d] Applying Rule 403 to Evidence Offered for Contradiction 1003United States v. Castillo 1003Note 1005[e] Facts That Only Contradict 1006United States v. Beauchamp 1006Question 1008

[4] Level Four — Bias 1008MODE 10: Bias/Partiality 1008[a] Illustration 1008[b] Admissibility Under the Federal Rules 1009United States v. Abel 1009Notes 1014

D. Rehabilitation 1015[1] Truthfulness After Attack 1016

[a] Federal Rule of Evidence 608(a) 1016[b] Cross- Examination as Attack 1016United States v. Medical Therapy Sciences, Inc. 1016Note 1018

[2] Prior Consistent Statements 1018Note 1020

E. Impeachment of Hearsay Declarants 1020[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 806 1020[2] Scope of Impeachment 1021

United States v. Grant 1021Note 1023

F. Sequestration of Witnesses 1024

Chapter 18 · Privilege 1029A. Federal Rule 501 1029B. Attorney- Client Privilege 1029

[1] Advisory Committee Draft of Attorney- Client Privilege 1029[2] Rationale for Attorney- Client Privilege and Application

to Corporate Repre sen ta tion 1032Upjohn Co. v. United States 1032Notes 1037

[3] The Privilege and Government Attorneys 1046In re County of Erie 1046Note 1050

[4] The Privilege and the Death of the Client 1052Swidler & Berlin v. United States 1052Note 1057


CONTENTS xxvii

[5] Waiver of the Attorney- Client Privilege 1059[a] Introduction 1059[b] Authority to Waive the Privilege 1059[c] “Selective” Waiver 1060[d] Protections Against Mistaken Disclosures (and Even

Intentional Disclosures) in the Course of Discovery: Federal Rule 502 1062

[e] Federal Rules of Evidence 502 1064Coburn Group v. Whitecap Advisors LLC 1071Rajala v. McGuire Woods, LLP 1077Notes 1082

C. Marital Privileges 10851. The Privilege Against Giving Adverse Testimony 1085

Trammel v. United States 10852. The Privilege Protecting Confidential Spousal Communications 1090

State of New Mexico v. Gutierrez 1090Notes 1100

D. Privilege Relating to Mental Health 1104Jaffee v. Redmond 1104Notes 1111

E. Privilege for Communications to Clergy 1112In re Grand Jury Investigation 1112Notes 1118

F. News Reporter’s Privilege 1118McKevitt v. Pallasch 1118In re Grand Jury Subpoena, Judith Miller 1121Note 1127

G. In for mant’s Privilege 1128McCray v. Illinois 1128Notes 1131

H. Executive Privilege 1132United States v. Nixon 1132Note 1136

I. State’s Secret Privilege 1138Sterling v. Tenet 1138Note 1145

J. Parent- Child Privilege? 1146In re Grand Jury 1146

Appendix of Problems 1153

Index 1267


xxix

Table of Cases

0.59 Acres of Land, United States v., 55614.38 Acres of Land, United States v.,

520Abel, United States v., 993, 1009Adames, United States v., 32Adams v. Toyota Motor Corp., 142, 143Adams, United States v. (10th Cir.

2001), 40Adams, United States v. (6th Cir. 2013),

636Adamson v. Cathel, 617Adefehinti, United States v., 885Adkins, United States v., 581Adlman, United States v., 1043Adobe Sys. v. Christenson, 388Ad-Vantage Tel. Directory Consultants,

Inc. v. GTE Directories, 989Aguilar, United States v., 853Air Crash Disaster, In re, 177, 179Albers, United States v., 982Albert, United States v., 712Alexander, United States v., 1039Alfa Corporation v. Oao Alfa Bank and

Alfa Capital Markets (USA), Inc., 563

Alford v. United States, 1011Alldread v. City of Grenada, 1063Allen J., United States v., 74Allen, People v., 975Allen, United States v., 147Alpex Computer Corp. v. Nintendo

Co., Ltd., 187Altobello v. Border Confectionery

Prods., Inc., 976Alvarez, United States v., 713

Alvarez-Farfan, United States v., 370Amaral, Commonwealth v., 384Amaya, United States v., 679Amaya-Manzanares, United States v.,

105Ambrosini v. Labarraque, 519American Bald Eagle v. Bhatti, 635Amoco Prod. Co. v. United States, 422Ancho v. Pentek Corp., 471Anderson v. City of Rockford, 588Anderson v. Malloy, 183Anderson v. United States, 381Andrews v. Metro N. Commuter R.R.

Co., 569Angwin, United States v., 303Appeal of (See Name of Appellant)Appolon, United States v., 431Arambula-Ruiz, United States v., 670Archdale, United States v., 15Ardoin v. J. Ray McDermott & Co., 17Arizona v. Elmer, 231Arizona, State of, v. Damper, 386Armijo, United States v., 102Artero, United States v., 555Ashby, United States v., 588Ashley, United States v., 977Asplundh Mfg. Div. v. Benton Harbor

Eng’g, 459Astorga-Torres, United States v., 756AT Engine Controls Ltd. v. Goodrich

Pump & Engine Control Sys., Inc., 382

Athey v. Farmers Ins. Exchange, 185Attridge v. Cencorp Div. of Dover

Techs. Int’l, Inc., 66


xxx TABLE OF CASES

Auclair, In re, 1040Austin v. Davis, 63Austin, United States v., 185, 192Awadallah, United States v., 122Ayers, State v., 77Azure, United States v., 840Badami v. Flood, 41Bagaric, United States v., 988Bailey, United States v., 634Baines, United States v., 529Baker v. Elcona Homes Corp., 801Baker v. State, 87Baker, United States v., 63Bakker, United States v., 434Ballou v. Henri Studios, Inc., 110Balthazard, United States v., 86Bamberger, United States v., 30Bansal, United States v., 389Barber v. Page, 851Bareford v. General Dynamics Corp.,

1145Barnard, United States v., 994Barone, United States v., 714Barraza, United States v., 64Barrett, United States v., 712, 715Barrow, United States v., 210Bates, United States v., 743Battle v. Memorial Hosp., 690Baugh ex rel. Baugh v. Cuprum S.A. de

C.V., 435Bauman v. Volkswagenwerk Aktieng-

esellschaft, 174Bauzó-Santiago, United States v., 196Bear Stearns & Co., Inc. v. Nanos, 365Bear Stops, United States v., 315Beasley, United States v., 122Beauchamp, United States v., 1006Becker v. ARCO Chem. Co., 307Bedonie, United States v., 44Beech Aircraft Corp. v. Rainey, 41, 485,

799Bek, United States v., 1111Bello, United States v., 928Bellucci, United States v., 578

Bemis v. Edwards, 731, 749, 811Benedetto, United States v., 1005Benedi v. McNeil-P.P.C., Inc., 501Bennett, United States v. (3d Cir. 1998),

574Bennett, United States v. (9th Cir.

2004), 424, 428Bensinger Co., United States v., 651Berber-Tinoco, United States v., 928Bernier v. Board of County Road Com-

missioners, 211Beros, United States v., 989Berrios, United States v., 600Berry v. City of Detroit, 468Bevill, Bresler & Schulman Asset Mgt.

Corp., In re, 1059Bey, United States v., 1037Bigesby, United States v., 714Bigham, United States v., 616Bintz, State v., 853Black v. Food Lion, Inc., 502Blackman, United States v., 629Blakey, United States v., 734Bland, United States v., 790Blechman, United States v., 791Blevins v. New Holland North Amer-

ica, 525Blinzler v. Marriott Int’l, 105Bobkoski v. Board of Educ. of Cary

Consol. Sch. Dist., 1137Bocra, United States v., 989Bogan, United States v., 451Bohrer, United States v., 806, 807Bond, United States v., 27Bondie v. Bic Corp., 792Bonds, United States v., 345, 654Borawick v. Shay, 97Boston, City of, v. S.S. Texaco Texas,

943Bouchard, State v., 77Bourjaily v. United States, 293, 485, 487,

518, 656, 851Bowden v. McKenna, 123Boyce, United States v., 731, 738, 825


TABLE OF CASES xxxi

Boykin v. Alabama, 204Brackeen, United States v., 965Bradley, United States v., 835Branch, United States v., 356Branzburg v. Hayes, 1119, 1120, 1123,

1125Brashier, United States v., 976Braun v. Lorillard Inc., 836Bray, United States v., 434Brazos River Auth. v. GE Ionics, Inc.,

180Brecht v. Abrahamson, 36Brennan’s, Inc. v. Brennan’s Rest.,

L.L.C., 927Brinson, United States v., 383Briscoe, United States v., 796Broadspring, Inc. v. Congoo, LLC, 382Brock, United States v., 1101Bromwich, People v., 881Brooks, United States v., 937Broomfield, United States v., 390Brown, United States v. (7th Cir. 1994),

573Brown, United States v. (D.C. Cir.

1973), 758, 763Brugnara, United States v., 69Bruguier, United States v., 237Brunsting v. Lutsen Mountains Corp.,

747Bruton v. United States, 851, 897Buchanan, United States v., 416Buck v. Thomas Cooley Law School,

937Budziak, United States v., 64Bumpass, United States v., 714Burch, United States v., 209Burdulis, United States v., 832Burge, United States v., 836Burks, United States v., 235Burnett, State v., 1129Burr, United States v., 1136Burroughs, United States v., 937Bush, United States v., 361Butler, United States v., 260

Byers v. Burleson, 1066Byrd, United States v., 1102Cabrera-Rivera, United States v., 859Caldwell, United States v., 267, 967California v. Green, 843, 851Cameron v. Otto Bock Orthopedic

Industry, Inc., 174, 178Cameron, United States v., 976Campbell, United States v. (5th Cir.

1996), 1060Campbell, United States v. (6th Cir.

1988), 435Campos, United States v., 574Cann v. Ford Motor Co., 173, 179Cantu, United States v., 585Caporale, United States v., 1119Caraballo, United States v., 806Cardascia, United States v., 762Carey, United States v., 90Carney, United States v., 293Caro, United States v., 592Carpenter, United States v., 90Carr v. Deeds, 637Carroll, United States v., 250 Carson v. Polley, 349Carter, United States v., 279Cartier v. Jackson, 424Casas, United States v., 441Castello, United States v., 64Castillo, United States v. (2d Cir. 1991),

476Castillo, United States v. (9th Cir.

1999), 1003Catabran, United States v., 398, 399Cates v. Morgan Portable Bldg. Corp.,

185, 191Causey, United States v., 969Cavallo v. Star Enter., 503Cendant Corp. Sec. Litig., In re, 1070Center for Auto Safety v. Department of

Justice, 189Cephus, United States v., 13Cerno, United States v., 120, 121


xxxii TABLE OF CASES

Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, Lon-don v. Sinkovich, 794

Cestnik, United States v., 790, 792CFTC v. Weintraub, 1059Chambers v. Mississippi, 156, 157Chapman v. California, 36Charter v. Chleborad, 212Chase v. General Motors Corp., 173Check, United States v., 603Cherry, United States v. (10th Cir.

2000), 724Cherry, United States v. (7th Cir. 1991),

620Childs, United States v., 785Chnapkova v. Koh, 991Chong Won Tai, United States v., 253Christie v. Brewer, 983Ciresi, United States v., 664Citizens Bank & Trust v. LPS Nat’l

Flood, LLC, 381City of (See Name of City)Claar v. Burlington N.R.R., 519, 524Clark, United States v., 37Cline v. City of Mansfield, 937Clinical Leasing Serv., United States v.,

16Clonts, United States v., 340Cloverland-Green Spring Dairies, Inc.

v. Pennsylvania Milk Marketing Board, 578

Coakley & Williams v. Structural Con-crete Equip., 185

Coburn Group v. Whitecap Advisors LLC, 1071

Cohen, United States v., 993Cole, United States v., 989Coleman v. American Broadcasting

Co., 1045Coleman, United States v., 1019Collins v. Kibort, 777, 785Collins v. Wayne Corp., 1014Collins, People v., 549Collis, United States v., 1044Colon, United States v., 168

Commonwealth v. (See Name of Com-monwealth)

Cone, United States v., 797Coohey, United States v., 377Cook v. Hoppin, 768, 771Cook v. McDonough Power Equip.,

Inc., 177Cordoba, United States v., 36Cornett, United States v., 670Cortes-Irizarry v. Corporacion Insular,

524Cosden Oil & Chem. Co. v. Karl O.

Helm A.G., 92Cote, United States v., 109County Court of Ulster v. Allen, 943Coursey v. Broadhurst, 977Covelli, United States v., 988Cowden v. BNSF Ry, 183Cox, United States v. (5th Cir. 1976),

977Cox, United States v. (6th Cir. 2017),

623Coy v. Iowa, 909Crabtree, United States v., 566Crane v. Kentucky, 156, 157Crawford v. Washington, 580, 827, 844,

859, 872, 875, 876Creaghe v. Iowa Home Mutual Casu-

alty Co., 576Crisp, United States v., 533, 534Croskey v. BMW of No. Am., Inc., 190Crowder, United States v., 169Crowe v. Marchand, 560Cruz, United States v. (2d Cir. 1992),

476Cruz, United States v. (2d Cir. 2004),

476Cruz, United States v. (11th Cir. 1985),

731Cunningham, United States v. (4th Cir.

1981), 967Cunningham, United States v. (11th

Cir. 1999), 122Curtin, United States v., 133, 135


TABLE OF CASES xxxiii

Cuthbertson, United States v., 1119D’Angelo v. United States, 410Dahlin, United States v., 242Danaipour v. McLarey, 769Dancy, United States v., 805Daneshvar, United States v., 382, 797Dang Vang v. Vang Xiong X. Toyed, 475Dargan, United States v., 717, 908Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuti-

cals, Inc., 107, 483, 489, 500, 505, 509, 514, 518, 519, 520, 521, 523, 927

David v. Pueblo Supermarket, 745Davignon v. Clemmey, 768Davis v. Alaska, 1011, 1014Davis v. Washington, 859, 869Davis, United States v. (3d Cir. 1999),

985Davis, United States v. (11th Cir. 1988),

572De Parias, United States v., 147Dean, United States v. (9th Cir. 1992),

586Dean, United States v. (D.C. Cir. 1993),

378Deary v. City of Gloucester, 990DeBoer, United States v., 434DeJohn, United States v., 357Delaware v. Fensterer, 626, 913Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 1015DeLeon, United States v., 835Delgado, United States v., 203Delgado-Marrero, United States v., 986DeLillo, United States v., 953Dellwood Farms, Inc. v. Cargill, Inc.,

1059Delpit, United States v., 225DeLuca v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuti-

cals, Inc., 566Delvecchio, United States v., 756DeMarco v. Ohio Decorative Products,

Inc., 409Demott, United States v., 586Dennis, United States v., 615, 951Denny v. Hutchinson Sales Corp., 810

Detection Sys., Inc. v. Pittway Corp., 1049

Diallo, United States v., 475Diaz, United States v. (3d Cir. 2020),

448Diaz, United States v. (9th Cir. 1992),

230Diaz, United States v. (N.D. Cal. 2007),

540Diaz-Lopez, United States v., 427Dickens v. State, 387Diehl v. Blaw-Knox, 182Dillon v. Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., 300Dimanche v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth.,

30Dimora, United States v., 299DiNapoli, United States v., 692, 694Dinkins, United States v., 721Dior, United States v., 931DiPaolo, United States v., 959DiSalvo, United States v., 64Diversified Industries v. Meredith, 1061Dixon v. International Harvester Co.,

182Dobbins v. Crain Brothers, Inc., 212Dodd, In re, 943Doe by Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 328,

333Doe, United States v. (1st Cir. 2013), 253Doerr, United States v., 836Dollar v. Long Mfg., N.C. Inc., 115Doster, State v., 1053Dotson, United States v., 780Douglas v. Alabama, 626Dowdell, United States v., 805Downing, United States v., 486, 487Dozie, United States v., 369Dube, United States v., 1118Duffy, United States v., 416Dunnican, United States v., 435Duran, United States v., 322Dutton v. Evans, 843, 848, 849, 851Eads, United States v., 123Eagle, United States v., 108


xxxiv TABLE OF CASES

Earls, United States v., 256, 451Eastridge Development Co. v. Halpert

Associates, Inc., 66Ebron, United States v., 712, 717Eclectic Properties East, LLC v. Marcus

& Millichap Co., 927Edwards, United States v. (5th Cir. 2012),

1046Edwards, United States v. (9th Cir.

1998), 45Edwards, United States v. (9th Cir.

2000), 341Edwards, United States v. (11th Cir.

1987), 573EEOC v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 927EEOC v. Gear Petroleum, Inc., 185Eisen, United States v., 953Elbert, United States v., 322Ellis, United States v., 885Ellzey, United States v., 108El-Mezain, United States v., 661Encarnacion-LaFontaine, United States

v., 396Engrebetsen v. Fairchild Aircraft Corp.,

566Enterline, United States v., 805EPA v. Mink, 1137Erie, In re County of, 1046Espino, United States v., 455Espinosa, United States v., 457Estrada, United States v., 977Evans v. Jeff D., 204Evans, United States v., 84, 448F.P., Interest of, 385Fagan, United States v., 419Faison, United States v., 681Farmer, United States v., 967Feldberg, In re, 1037Feliz, United States v., 807Ferguson v. Commissioner of Internal

Revenue, 70Ferra, United States v., 663Ferrad, United States v., 396Fiberglass Insulators, Inc. v. Dupuy, 192

Field, United States v., 976Fields, United States v., 668Figueroa-Cartagena, United States v.,

908Figueroa-Lopez, United States v., 455,

459Finchum v. Ford Motor Co., 145Finestone, United States v., 122First Nat’l State Bank v. Reliance Elec.

Co., 475Fish v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 179Fisher v. United States 1033Flaharty, United States v., 990Flaminio v. Honda Motor Company,

Ltd., 174, 177, 181Flores-de-Jesús, United States v., 441Flournoy v. City of Chicago, 841Fluker, United States v., 381, 383Fonseca, United States v., 30Foster, United States v. (6th Cir. 1997),

693, 694Foster, United States v. (11th Cir. 2018),

64Foster, United States v. (D.C. Cir. 1993),

105Fountain, United States v., 586Four Million, Two Hundred Fifty-Five

Thousand Dollars, United States v., 927

Fowler, United States v., 72Fraley v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 803Franco, United States v., 785Franklin National Bank Securities Liti-

gation, In re, 1137Frazier v. Continental Oil Co., 475Frederick v. Kirby Tankships, Inc., 31Frederick, United States v., 1038Freeman, United States v., 663Freidin, United States v., 795Freidus v. First National Bank of Coun-

cil Bluffs, 190Fryberg, United States v., 805Frye v. United States, 482, 484, 505FTC v. Amy Travel Serv., 840


TABLE OF CASES xxxv

FTC v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharms., Inc., 1040

Fuentes-Cariaga, United States v., 476Fun-Damental Too, Ltd. v. Gemmy

Indus. Corp., 590Funk v. United States, 1087Fusco v. Gen. Motors Corp., 144Fusco, United States v., 985Gagliardi, United States v., 393Gaines, United States v., 973Galarnyk v. Hostmark Management,

Inc., 193Gamory, United States v., 135Gann, United States v., 1042Garcia, United States v., 713Gardner v. Galetka, 123Garland v. Herrin, 110Garner v. Wolfinbarger, 1057Garvey v. Dickinson College, 307Gauthier v. AMF, Inc., 174, 179Gaviria v. Reynolds, 497Gay, State v., 156General Electric Co. v. Joiner, 369, 489,

521George v. Celotex Corp., 583Gibbs, United States v., 476Gibson, United States v., 443Gil, United States v., 645Gilbert v. Cosco, Inc., 145Gilbert, United States v., 953Giles v. California, 894Gillock, United States v., 1107Gilmore v. Palestinian Interim Self-

Gov’t Auth., 718Ginter v. Northwestern Mutual Life Ins.

Co., 218, 219Gladish, United States v., 573Glaser v. Thompson Med. Co., 501Glasser v. United States, 658Glenn, United States v., 443, 465Glowczenski v. Taser Intern., Inc., 827Glynn, United States v., 538Goldin, United States v., 356

Gomez, United States v. (7th Cir. 2014), 243, 249, 253, 300

Gonzales v. National Broadcasting Co., 1119, 1120

Gora v. Costa, 978Gorby v. Schneider Tank Lines, Inc.,

443Gorman, United States v., 262, 298Gosier v. Welborn, 64Gotti, United States v., 199Gould, United States v., 933Government of (See Name of Govern-

ment)Grady, United States v., 806Graham v. Wyeth Labs., 820Graham, United States v. (4th Cir.

2013), 672Graham, United States v. (5th Cir.

1988), 587, 588, 1023Grand Jury Investigation, In re (2d Cir.

2005), 1052Grand Jury Investigation, In re (3d Cir.

1990), 1112Grand Jury Matter No. 91-01386, In re,

1041Grand Jury Proceedings, In re (3d Cir.

1997), 1112, 1146Grand Jury Proceedings, In re (4th Cir.

1994), 1042Grand Jury Proceedings, In re (6th Cir.

1987), 1119, 1120Grand Jury Proceedings, In re (9th Cir.

1993), 1119Grand Jury Proceedings, In re (9th Cir.

1996), 1044, 1045Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum, In

re, 1039Grand Jury Subpoena, In re, 1059Grand Jury Subpoena, Judith Miller, In

re, 1121Grand Jury Subpoena, Peek, In re, 1037Grand Jury, In re, 1044Grant, United States v. (2d Cir. 1992),

340


xxxvi TABLE OF CASES

Grant, United States v. (11th Cir. 2001), 1021

Gray v. Maryland, 902Gray, United States v. (4th Cir. 2005),

723, 724Gray, United States v. (5th Cir. 2012),

354Green, United States v. (3d Cir. 2009),

731Green, United States v. (3d Cir. 2010),

297Green, United States v. (7th Cir. 2001),

777Green, United States v. (7th Cir.1982),

758Green, United States v. (11th Cir.1994),

260Green, United States v. (D. Mass. 2005),

540Greenidge, United States v., 1005Greenspan, United States v., 34Gregory, State v., 156Grenada Steel Industries, Inc., v. Ala-

bama Oxygen Co., Inc., 174, 177Grier, United States v., 105Griffin v. California, 63Griffin, In re, 422Grizzle v. Travelers Health Network,

Inc., 45Grunewald v. United States, 671Gual Morales v. Hernandez Vega, 756Guam, People of the Territory of, v.

Shymanovitz, 128Guenther v. Armstrong Rubber Co.,

554Guerrero, United States v., 35Gulf States Utils. Co. v. Ecodyne Corp.,

124Gupta, United States v., 230, 715Gutman, United States v., 80Guzman-Montanez, United States v.,

120, 122Habibi, United States v., 256, 466Haddad, United States v., 635

Haddock, United States v., 422Haight, United States v., 372Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner &

Co., 836, 841Hall v. American Bakeries Co., 90Hall, United States v., 835Halloran v. Virginia Chemicals Inc.,

307Hamilton, United States v., 1103Haney v. Mizell Memorial Hosp., 15Hankins, United States v., 124Hannigan, United States v., 554Hans, United States v., 976Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rent-

als, Inc., 927Hardin v. Ski Venture, Inc., 472Harding v. State, 94Harris, United States v. (7th Cir. 1990),

654Harris, United States v. (9th Cir. 1984),

976Harrison v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 181,

182Hart v. O’Brien, 83Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Garvey, 1067Harvey, United States v. (7th Cir. 1997),

338, 372Harvey, United States v. (8th Cir. 1978),

976Harwood, United States v., 637Haugh v. Schroder Inv. Mgmt. North

Am. Inc., 1043Hawkins v. United States, 1085, 1086,

1087Hayes, United States v., 963Haynes v. White County, Ark., 842Healthcare Corp. Billing Practices Liti-

gation, 1061Heard, United States v., 310, 989Hearst, United States v., 257Hebeka, United States v., 620Hefferon, United States v., 746Heller v. Shaw Industries, Inc., 520, 521


TABLE OF CASES xxxvii

Hemphill v. Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth., 989

Henry, United States v., 383Henthorn, United States v., 280, 294Heriot v. Byrne, 1073, 1075Herrington v. Hiller, 122Heyne v. Caruso, 300Hickey, United States v., 82, 84Hicks, United States v. (4th Cir. 1984),

15Hicks, United States v. (7th Cir. 2011),

264Hiern v. Sarpy, 497High Fructose Corn Syrup Antitrust

Litig., In re, 496Hill v. Rolleri, 108Hill v. Spiegel, Inc., 650Hill, United States v., 231Hilyer v. Howat Concrete Co., 731Hines v. Brandon Steel Decks, Inc., 808,

809, 810Hoffman, United States v., 956Hoffner, United States v., 439Holmes v. South Carolina, 155Hoosier, United States v., 639Hopson v. City of Baltimore, 1066,

1067, 1069Horton, United States v., 127Hoselton v. Metz Baking Co., 792Hove, United States v., 645Howard, United States v., 411, 418, 419Hubbard, United States v., 1042Huddleston v. United States, 29, 290,

299Hughes v. United States, 933Hunt, United States v., 690Hurd, State v., 94Hyson, United States v., 46Ibern-Maldonado, United States v., 671In re (See Name of Party or Matter)In re County of (See Name of County)In the Matter of (See Name of Matter

or Party)Ince, United States v., 952

Ingraham, United States v., 372Interest of (See Name of Party)Ira Green, Inc. v. Military Sales & Ser-

vice Co., 797Iron Shell, United States v., 767Irons v. FBI, 19Irvin, United States v. (7th Cir. 1996),

121Irvin, United States v. (10th Cir. 2012),

433Isabella, United States v., 388Iu, United States v., 623Jackman, United States v., 451Jackson v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.,

141Jackson, United States v., 600Jacobs, United States v., 1045, 1059Jaffee v. Redmond, 1104, 1126, 1148James Julian, Inc. v. Raytheon Co., 91James, United States v., 654Jaramillo-Suarez, United States v., 588Jarrett v. United States, 959Jass, United States v., 909Jefferson, United States v. (5th Cir.

2010), 976, 981Jefferson, United States v. (8th Cir.

2000), 670Jimenez Lopez, United States v., 354,

355Joe, United States v., 770John Doe Corp., In re, 1061John Doe Grand Jury Investigation, In

re, 1053Johns-Manville/Asbestosis Cases, In re,

688Johns-Manville/Asbestosis Cases, In

the Matter of, 687Johnson v. Ford Motor Co., 433Johnson v. Zerbst, 204Johnson, State v., 632Johnson, United States v. (3d Cir. 2002),

969Johnson, United States v. (3d Cir. 2004),

977


xxxviii TABLE OF CASES

Johnson, United States v. (D. Conn. 2015), 640

Johnson, United States v. (S.D.N.Y. 2019), 528

Joint Eastern Dist. and Southern Dist. Asbestos Litig. v. Armstrong World Indust., Inc., In re, 173

Jones v. Southern P. Railroad, 303, 307, 311

Jones, United States v. (2d Cir. 1992), 412

Jones, United States v. (5th Cir. 1981), 578

Jones, United States v. (6th Cir. 1997), 523

Jordan v. United States DOJ, 1137Josefik, United States v., 205Joshi, United States v., 645Judd v. Rodman, 312Jung, United States v., 654Kairys, United States v., 815Kaiser, United States v., 795Kalish, United States v., 224Kamahele, United States v., 893Kane, United States v., 953Kannankeril v. Terminix Int’l, Inc., 501,

519Karl v. Burlington N. R. Co., 66Kassel v. Gannett Co., 786Katsougrakis, United States v., 592Kehm v. Procter & Gamble Mfg. Co.,

809, 810Keiser, United States v., 232Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., In re, 91,

1039Kelly v. Crown Equipment Co., 173Kennedy, United States v., 991Kentucky v. Stincer, 627Kepner-Tregoe v. Leadership Software,

Inc., 578Khan, United States v., 362Kielar, United States v., 952Kimball, United States v., 676King, United States v., 119

Kingston, United States v., 363Kirk v. Raymark Indus., Inc., 649, 836Knife, United States v., 748Knight v. Miami-Dade County, 7Koecher, Appeal of, 1102, 1103Koon, United States v., 454Kostelecky v. NL Acme Tool/NL Indus-

tries, Inc., 452Kotteakos v. United States, 615Kovel, United States v., 1043Krapp, United States v., 239Kumho Tire Company, Ltd. v. Carmi-

chael, 509, 518, 519, 520, 522, 523Lamonica v. Safe Hurricane Shutters,

Inc., 680Lampley, United States v., 260Lanci, United States v., 83Landsberg v. Scrabble Crossword Game

Players, Inc., 607Langford, United States v., 785LaPierre, United States v., 451Lara, United States v., 19Lard, State v., 1098Larez v. City of Los Angeles, 829Lawal, United States v., 755Lawes v. CSA Architects and Engineers

LLP, 498Lawrence, United States v., 698, 835Lawson, United States v. (2d Cir. 1982),

201Lawson, United States v. (D.C. Cir.

2005), 253Lawson, United States v. (D.C. Cir.

2007), 355Leake, United States v., 991, 992Leal-Del Carmen, United States v., 726Lebowitz, United States v., 399LeFevour, United States v., 635Legg v. Chopra, 46Lehder-Rivas, United States v., 36Lemay, United States v., 326Lennon v. Norfolk and Western Ry.

Co., 526Leonard-Allen, United States v., 41


TABLE OF CASES xxxix

Lester, United States v., 972, 976Leucadia, Inc. v. Reliance Ins. Co., 91Levine, United States v., 411Lewis, United States v. (7th Cir. 1992),

635Lewis, United States v. (7th Cir. 2011),



928LiCausi, United States v., 670Liebman, United States v., 1041Lightly, United States v., 960Lillie v. United States, 69Lilly v. Virginia, 851, 853Linde v. Arab Bank PLC, 717Lindemann, United States v., 985Lindsey, In re, 1048, 1050Lindstrom, United States v., 960Lipscomb, United States v., 967Liriano, United States v., 858Lisenba v. California, 286Livingston, United States v., 612Llera Plaza, United States v., 537, 539Lloyd v. American Export Lines, Inc.,

688Lockhart v. McCotter, 337, 340Lois Sportswear, U.S.A., Inc. v. Levi

Strauss & Co., 1067Looper, United States v., 71Lopez v. Missouri, K. & T. R. Co., 410Lorraine v. Markel Am. Ins. Co., 383,

384, 385Lott, United States v., 877, 885Love, United States v., 599Lowery, United States v., 111Loyola-Dominguez, United States v.,

805Luce v. United States, 27, 963Lundy, United States v., 387, 399Lust by & Through Lust v. Merrell Dow

Pharms., 521Lust v. Sealy, Inc., 732, 740

Lyle, United States v., 210Lyondell Chem. Co. v. Occidental

Chem. Corp. 192M.B.A.F.B. Federal Credit Union v.

Cumis Ins. Soc’y, 83Macaulay v. Anas, 18MacCloskey, United States v., 676, 677MacDonald, United States v., 715Macumber, State v., 1053Madden, In re, 1119Madden, United States v., 257Maher, United States v., 457Mahlandt v. Wild Canid Survival &

Research Ctr., Inc., 633, 634, 646Mahone, United States v., 337Malkin v. United States, 424Manafzadeh, United States v., 634Mangual-Santiago, United States v.,

666, 667Manley, United States v., 400Manocchio v. Moran, 562Mansaw, United States v., 989Marbury v. Madison, 1133Markopoulos, United States v., 588Marrowbone, United States v., 737Marshall v. Postal Serv., 91Martin v. Funtime, Inc., 435Martin v. United States, 614Martinez, United States v. (5th Cir.

1992), 32Martinez, United States v. (7th Cir.

1993), 235Martinez, United States v. (9th Cir.

1999), 276Martins v. 3PD, Inc., 938Marvel Characters, Inc. v. Kirby, 560Maryland v. Craig, 911Mascio, United States v., 306Mathis, United States v., 685Mattox v. United States (U.S. 1892), 697Mattox v. United States (U.S. 1895),

626, 843, 850, 851, 856, 913Mauldin v. Upjohn Co., 956


xl TABLE OF CASES

Maxwell, United States v. (7th Cir. 2013), 893

Maxwell, United States v. (11th Cir. 2009), 21

McCann v. The George W. Newman Irrevocable Trust, 939

McCarthy, United States v., 663McCleskey, United States v., 715McClure v. State, 583McCormack v. Hiedeman, 937McCray v. Illinois, 1128McCullock v. H.B. Fuller Co. (2d Cir.

1992), 471McCullock v. H.B. Fuller Co. (2d

Cir.1995), 501McElroy, United States v., 735McFall, United States v., 693McGlory, United States v., 372McGregor, United States v., 116McHenry v. Chadwick, 967McHorse, United States v., 242McInnis v. A.M.F., Inc., 176McIntosh, United States v., 375McIntyre, United States v., 588, 791McKenna, United States v., 16McKeon, United States v., 652McKevitt v. Pallasch, 1118McKim v. Philadelphia Transp. Co., 956McMahon, United States v., 370McNeill, United States v., 949McQueeney v. Wilmington Trust Co.,

36, 113McVeigh, United States v., 148Meder v. Everest & Jennings, Inc., 731,

749Medical Therapy Sciences, Inc., United

States v., 1016Mehl v. EPA, 1137Meises, United States v., 83, 440, 448,

589Mejia, United States v., 1042Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 339,

813, 876Merrill, United States v., 202

Mersch v. City of Dallas, 96Meza-Urtado, United States v., 15Mezzanatto, United States v., 203Michelson v. United States, 219, 226,

231Michigan v. Bryant, 859Middleton v. Harris Press & Shear, Inc.,

183Midgett, United States v., 7Milham, United States v., 1003Miller v. Keating, 749Miller v. Universal City Studios, Inc.,

1026Miller, United States v. (7th Cir. 2012),

169, 261, 299, 300Miller, United States v. (D.C. Cir. 1990),

693, 694Mills, United States v., 718Milward v. Acuity Specialty Products

Group, Inc., 496Mines, United States v., 714Minter v. Prime Equip. Co., 181, 182Misek-Falkoff v. International Bus.

Machs. Corp., 1038Mitchell, United States v. (3d Cir. 2004),

534, 535, 536Mitchell, United States v. (D.C. Cir.

2016), 339Mitroff v. Xomox Corp., 571Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc.,

1145Mohr, United States v., 465Mojica-Baez, United States v., 671Monserrate-Valentin, United States v.,

714Montague, United States v., 620Monteiro, United States v., 539Monteleone, United States v., 240Montes v. Macomber, 63Moore v. Ashland Chemical, Inc., 520Moore, United States v. (7th Cir. 1986),

740, 741, 746, 748Moore, United States v. (7th Cir. 1997),

252


TABLE OF CASES xli

Morales v. Artuz, 921Morales, United States v. (9th Cir.

1997), 574Morales, United States v. (9th Cir.

2013), 811Morgan v. Foretich, 77, 746, 771Morgan, United States v. (2d Cir. 1977),

241Morgan, United States v. (2d Cir. 2004),

834Morgan, United States v. (2d Cir. 2015),

127Morgan, United States v. (7th Cir.

2019), 279Morgan, United States v. (10th Cir.

2014), 671Morlang, United States v., 952Morrison, United States v., 7Morrow, United States v., 908Moses, United States v. (3d Cir. 1998),

716Moses, United States v. (8th Cir.1994),

737Moss v. Ole South Real Estate Inc., 811Moss, United States v., 738Mullaney v. Wilbur, 946Murphy, United States v. (6th Cir.

1988), 64Murphy, United States v. (9th Cir.

1995), 1101Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York

v. Hillmon, 751, 761, 762Muzyka v. Remington Arms Co., 182Myers v. Pennzoil Co., 191Nachtsheim v. Beech Aircraft Corp.,

137, 809Napier, United States v., 859Nasser, United States v., 921Neal, United States v., 1093Nellis v. Air Line Pilots Ass’n, 1058Nelson v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.,

525Neville Construction Co. v. Cook Paint

and Varnish, 422

New Jersey Turnpike Auth. v. PPG Indus., 809

New Mexico, State of, v. Gutierrez, 1090New York Renu with Moistureloc Prod.

Liab. Litig., In re, 1038Nguyen v. Excel Corp., 1066Nieves, People v., 698Nimely v. City of New York, 477Nixon, United States v. (U.S. 1974),

1051, 1132Nixon, United States v. (5th Cir. 1985),

242NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 1136Noel, United States v., 454Nolan v. Memphis City Schools, 179Norman, United States v., 819Norquay, United States v., 585North Miss. Commun., Inc. v. Jones,

680North, United States v., 1146Norwood, United States v., 584Noushfar, United States v., 36NXIVM Corp. v. O’Hara, 1043O’Conner v. Commonwealth Edison

Co., 523O’Dell v. Hercules, Inc., 810O’Malley, United States v., 989O’Neal v. Morgan, 364Oates, United States v., 805Ocasio-Ruiz, United States v., 713, 714Odmark v. Westside Bancorp., Inc.,

1060Odom, United States v., 73Ohio v. Clark, 870Ohio v. Roberts, 845, 851, 855, 856, 870,

872, 875, 913Ohler v. United States, 28, 974Olano, United States v. (U.S. 1993), 37Olano, United States v. (9th Cir. 1995),

1041Old Chief v. United States, 29, 160, 247,

263Olden v. Kentucky, 323Olson, United States v., 202


xlii TABLE OF CASES

Olsson, United States v., 992Omar, United States v., 694Opus 3 Ltd. v. Heritage Park, Inc., 1024Orantes-Hernandez v. Smith, 927Ordonez, United States v., 644Orozco-Santillan, United States v., 364Orrico, United States v., 616Ortega, United States v., 892Ortiz, United States v., 27Osazuwa, United States v., 982Osburn v. Anchor Labs., 471Oti, United States v., 570Owens, United States v., 625Owens-El, United States v., 83Pace, United States v., 296Pacheco, United States v., 769Pacific Pictures Corp., In re, 1061Page, United States v., 989Paguio, United States v., 705, 714Paiva, United States v., 68Palmer v. Hoffman, 793, 803, 881Palmieri v. DeFaria, 27Palumbo, United States v., 616Pandit v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 143Paoli R.R. Yard PCB Litig., In re, 503,

521, 524Papajohn, United States v., 853Pappas v. Middle Earth Condominium

Ass’n, 652Park v. Huff, 597Parker, United States v. (4th Cir. 1987),

1101Parker, United States v. (5th 1998), 361Parr v. United States, 164Pastore, United States v., 369Patrick, United States v., 791Patterson v. New York, 946Paulus, United States v., 191Pearce v. E.F. Hutton Group, Inc., 809Pelster v. Ray, 589Peltier, United States v., 125Pelton & Rich, United States v., 674Pelullo, United States v., 433Pena-Gutierrez, United States v., 806

Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado, 48People of the Territory of (See Name of

Territory)People v. (See Name of Defendant)Peralta, United States v., 661Perez, In re, 1131Perez, United States v., 927Perez-Ruiz, United States v., 31Perkins, United States v., 462, 568Perrin v. Anderson, 308Persico, United States v., 712, 713Persinger v. Norfolk & W. Ry., 476Peterman, United States v., 953Peters v. Five Star Marine Service, 476Peters, United States v., 279Petersen v. Boeing Co., 927Peterson v. City of Plymouth, 570Peterson, United States v., 676, 677Peveto, United States v., 588Peyro, United States v., 83Phibbs, United States v., 78Philadelphia v. Westinghouse Electric

Corp., 1034Phillips v. Western Co. of N. Am., 104Pierce v. Atchison T. & S.F. Ry., 786Pierce v. F.R. Tripler & Co., 186Pierce v. Ramsey Winch Co., 435Pitocchelli, United States v., 17Pitts, United States v., 367Plaza, United States v., 539Plummer v. Springfield Term. Ry., 66Pointer v. Texas, 843, 851Polidore, United States v., 728, 750Pollard, United States v., 768Pollock, United States v., 260Pomona, City of, v. SQM N. Am. Corp.

30Ponzo, United States v., 671Portsmouth Paving Corp., United

States v., 649Potter, United States v., 254Powers, United States v. (4th Cir. 1995),

120


TABLE OF CASES xliii

Powers, United States v. (7th Cir. 1996), 83

Prentiss & Carlisle v. Koehring-Water-ous, 179

Prewitt, United States v., 184Price, United States v., 340Prieto, United States v., 339Pritchard-Keang Nam Corp. v. Jawor-

ski, 1046Pritchett, United States v., 69Proano, United States v., 81Probus v. K-Mart, Inc., 179Providence Journal Co. v. United States

Dep’t of the Army, 1137Provost, United States v., 769Pruitt, United States v., 364Puckett, United States v., 7Puerta Restrepo, United States v., 364Quarles v. Department of Navy, 1137Quinn, United States v., 507Quintel Corp., N.V. v. Citibank, N.A.,

1058R. v. (See Name of Defendant)Ragghianti, United States v., 614Railroad Management Company LLC

v. CFS Louisiana Midstream Co., 420Rajala v. McGuire Woods, LLP, 1077Ramada Development Co. v. Rauch,

186Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Technologies

AG, 377Ramey v. Shalala, 566Ramirez, United States v., 78Ramos-Oseguera, United States v., 1102Ramrattan v. Burger King Corp., 767Raskin v. Wyatt Co., 554Raymond v. Raymond Corp., 173Raynor v. Merrell Pharms., Inc., 501Reaves, United States v., 4Redditt, United States v., 990Reed v. Baxter, 41, 1042Reed v. Thalacker, 737, 738Reed, United States v., 992Reeder, United States v., 1045

Reeves, United States v., 672Reid Bros. Logging Co. v. Ketchikan

Pulp Co., 649Reid, United States v., 279Reilly, United States v., 377Relion, Inc. v. Hydra Fuel Cell Corp.,

1075Reme, United States v., 288Renville, United States v., 767, 769Revels v. Vincenz, 960Reyes v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.,

309Reynolds, United States v., 1138, 1139,

1140, 1141, 1144Rhode Island v. Innis, 850Ricardo B., People v., 908Richard Roe, Inc., In re, 1046Richards, United States v., 275Richardson v. Marsh, 897Riley, United States v., 785Rios, United States v., 892Rivera, United States v. (2d Cir. 1994),

443Rivera, United States v. (9th Cir. 1995),

746Roach, United States v., 471Roberson v. United States, 15Roberson, United States v., 1102Roberts, United States v., 230, 231Robertson, United States v., 1027Robinson, United States v. (7th Cir.

1998), 252Robinson, United States v. (10th Cir.

1992), 293Robles v. Exxon Corp., 67Rocha, United States v., 255Rock v. Arkansas, 95, 96, 157, 317Rock v. Huffco Gas & Oil Co., 765Rockwell Int’l, United States v., 1038Rodriguez v. Banco Cent. Corp., 15Rodriguez-Garcia, United States v., 15Rodriguez-Hernandez v. Miranda-

Velez, 314Roenigk, United States v., 29


xliv TABLE OF CASES

Rogers v. McMackin, 908Rogers, United States v. (7th Cir. 2009),

332Rogers, United States v. (8th Cir. 1976),

996Rollins, United States v., 556Romero v. State, 921Rommy, United States v., 778Rosario-Pérez, United States v., 709Rosemond, United States v., 210Rosenburg v. Lincoln American Life

Ins. Co., 307Rosenfeld v. Basquiat, 47Ross v. City of Memphis, 1048Roviaro v. United States, 1129Rubin, United States v., 989Rucker, United States v., 975Ruggiero, United States v., 65Ruiz, State v., 384RuizTroche v. Pepsi Cola, 521Rush v. Illinois Cent. R.R. Co., 90Russell, United States v., 105Rutherford, United States v., 64Saadey, United States v., 368Safavian, United States v., 338, 376, 382Salerno, United States v., 654, 691Salvador, United States v., 715Sampol, United States v., 955, 959Sana v. Hawaiian Cruises, Ltd., 792Sanabria, United States v., 21Sanders, United States v., 969Sandstrom v. Montana, 947Santiago, United States v. (1st Cir.2009),

467Santiago, United States v. (9th Cir.

1995), 255Santos, United States v., 447Sarracino, United States v., 147Satcher v. Honda Motor Co., 471Satterfield, United States v., 712Saulter, United States v., 360Schafer v. Time, Inc., 220Scheffer, United States v., 156, 157, 158Schoenborn, United States v., 777

Schroeder, In re, 1038SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 1038Scop, United States v., 569Scott v. Hammock, 1118Scott v. PPG Indus., 1137Scott v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 473Scott, United States v. (1st Cir. 2001),

366Scott, United States v. (2d Cir. 2012),

253Sealed Case, In re (D.C. Cir. 1989),

1062, 1067Sealed Case, In re (D.C. Cir. 1997), 1137Seamster, United States v., 967Sebetich, United States v., 952SEC v. Hughes Capital Corp., 433Seiler v. Lucasfilm, Ltd., 412Sepulveda, United States v., 668, 1026Serrano, United States v., 671Sewell, United States v., 746Shain, In re, 1119Shargel, In re, 1041Sheehan v. Daily Racing Form, Inc.,

519, 555Sheffey, United States v., 569Shelledy, United States v., 970Shepard v. United States, 698, 758, 762Shoen v. Shoen, 1119Shores, United States v., 587Shows v. M/V Red Eagle, 967Shukri, United States v., 713Shulman, United States v., 641, 642Shwayder, United States v., 241Siddiqui, United States v., 383, 384Siegelman, United States v., 669Silverman, United States v., 662Silverstein, United States v., 712, 715Simmons, Inc. v. Pinkerton’s, Inc., 986Simon, United States v., 927Simplex, Inc. v. Diversified Energy Sys-

tems, Inc., 306Simpson, United States v. (10th Cir.

1991), 66


TABLE OF CASES xlv

Simpson, United States v. (10th Cir. 1998), 383

Sinatra v. Heckler, 943Sinclair, United States v., 835Sincox v. United States, 67Singer, United States v., 975Sitton, United States v., 201Slaughter, United States v., 585Sliker, United States v., 394, 410Smalley, United States v., 21Smith v. BMW No. Am., Inc., 509Smith v. Bray, 661Smith v. Chesapeake & Ohio Ry., 35Smith v. Georgia, 107Smith v. Isuzu Motors, Ltd., 809Smith v. Ithaca Corp., 801Smith v. Rapid Transit, Inc., 554Smith, United States v. (4th Cir. 2009),

411Smith, United States v. (4th Cir. 2019),


1119, 1120Smith, United States v. (7th Cir. 1996),



259Smith, United States v. (D.C. Cir. 1975),

92Smith-Bowman, United States v., 241Solorio, United States v., 102Sorrells, United States v., 928Soto-Beniquez, United States v., 6, 356Soulard, United States v., 399Soures, United States v., 635Southern Stone Co. v. Singer, 645, 780Sowa, United States v., 746Specht v. Google, Inc., 390Special Proceedings, In re, 1127Spector v. State, 231Spell v. McDaniel, 185Sperling, United States v., 756, 989

Splettstoeszer, United States v., 333Spletzer, United States v., 169Spriggs, United States v., 25Sprynczynatyk v. General Motors

Corp., 97Squillacote, United States v., 672Stagl v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 472Stanley v. Amoco Oil Co., 179State of (See Name of State)State v. (See Name of Defendant)Staton v. Fought, 71Stein v. Bowman, 1092Sterling v. Tenet, 1138, 1145Sterling v. Velsicol Chem. Corp., 520Sterling, United States v., 1127Stevens, United States v., 208Stevenson v. Commonwealth, 591Stidum v. Trickey, 738Stine v. Marathon Oil Co., 16Stockton, United States v., 411Stolt Achievement, Ltd. v. Dredge B.E.

Lindholm, 471Stoltz, United States v., 971Stratton, United States v., 661Straub v. Reading Co., 11, 16Strissel, United States v., 433Strother, United States v., 786Suarez Matos v. Ashford Presbyterian

Community Hosp., 15Sublime v. Sublime Remembered, 390Subpoenaed Grand Jury Witness, In re,

1041Summers, United States v., 598Supermarket of Marlinton, Inc. v.

Meadow Gold Dairies, Inc., 691Sutton, United States v. (8th Cir. 1994),

256Sutton, United States v. (D.C. Cir.

1986), 635Swidler & Berlin v. United States, 1052Sylvester, United States v., 210Tank, United States v., 397, 400Tannehill, United States v., 690


xlvi TABLE OF CASES

Tarantino, United States v., 985, 1003, 1005, 1007

Tassin v. Sears Roebuck, 523Taylor v. Charter Medical Corp., 936Taylor, United States v., 356Tedder, United States v., 1039Teevee Toons, Inc., v. MP3.com, Inc., 66Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar

Satellite Corporation, 388Tellier, United States v., 661Tenet v. Doe, 1138, 1141Tennessee v. Street, 851, 858Terry v. State, 146Terzado-Madruga, United States v., 120Thigpen, United States v., 571Thomas, United States v. (6th Cir.

1996), 476Thomas, United States v. (7th Cir.

2002), 339Thompson v. Boggs, 310Thompson, United States v. (7th Cir.

1993), 121Thompson, United States v. (8th Cir.

1983), 616Thornberg, United States v., 31Thorne, United States v., 588Threadgill v. Armstrong World Indus-

tries, Inc, 815Three Mile Island Litigation, In re, 504Tin Yat Chin, United States v., 394Tocco, United States v., 716Tokars, United States v., 762Tom, United States v., 670Tome v. United States, 618, 622Torres v. County of Oakland, 453Torres, United States v., 597Torres-Flores, United States v., 170Torrez-Ortega, United States v., 629Tory, United States v., 109Towns, United States v., 782Tracy, United States v., 127Trammel v. United States, 1033, 1085,

1091, 1097, 1107

Transorient Navigators Co., S.A. v. M/S Southwind, 927

Traylor v. Husqvarna Motor Co., 180Troutman, United States v., 307Trull v. Volkswagen of Am., Inc., 180Tse, United States v., 671Tucker v. Ohtsu Tire & Rubber Co.,

1068Turner v. Burlington N.S.F. R.R., 560Turner, United States v. (6th Cir. 1993),

634Turner, United States v. (8th Cir. 1999),

791Tyus v. Urban Search Management, 519Udeagu, United States v., 200Uforma/Shelby Bus. Forms, Inc. v.

NLRB, 185U-Haul v. Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co,

796Uitts v. General Motors Corp., 141Umawa Oke Imo, United States v., 989United Mine Workers of America

Employee Benefit Plans Litig., In re, 1067

United States Aviation Underwriters, Inc. v. Olympia Wings, Inc., 29

United States Dep’t of Justice v. Lan-dano, 1131

United States v. (See Name of Defen-dant)

Upjohn Co. v. United States, 1032, 1048Urena, United States v., 21Ursic v. Bethlehem Mines, 927Vagenos v. LDG Financial Services,

LLC, 429Valance v. Wisel, 943Valdez-Maltos, United States v., 806Valencia, United States v., 968Valenti, United States v., 29Valerio, United States v., 589Van Meerbeke, United States v., 46Varcoe v. Lee, 924Varoudakis, United States v., 256Vayner, United States v., 391


TABLE OF CASES xlvii

Vázquez-Rivera, United States v., 571Vázquez-Soto, United States v., 355Velasquez, United States v., 241Velazquez, United States v., 169Venson v. Altamirano, 34Versaint, United States v., 805VeytiaBravo, United States v., 783Vigneau, United States v., 787, 791Vingelli v. DEA, 1041Vinyard v. Vinyard Funeral Home, Inc.,

582Virgin Islands v. Knight, 451Virgin Islands, Government of, v.

Albert, 147Virgin Islands, Government of, v. Bed-

ford, 968Virgin Islands, Government of, v.

Petersen, 955Visser v. Packer Engineering Assoc., 84Vitrano, United States v., 339Vodusek v. Bayliner Marine Corp., 431Vogel v. Sylvester, 983von Bulow v. von Bulow, 1119Waddell v. Commissioner, 786Walden v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 29Walker, United States v., 321, 323Wallace, United States v., 601Waller Creek, Ltd., In re, 927Wammock v. Celotex Corp., 1000Wandahsega, United States v., 636Ward, United States v., 72Warger v. Shauers, 52, 65Warman, United States v., 668Washington v. Texas, 157Washington, United States v., 977Watkins v. Telsmith, Inc., 522Watson v. State, 98Watson, United States v., 359Webb, State v., 848Webster, United States v., 952, 953Weeks, United States v., 600Weichert, United States v., 991Weil v. Investment/Indicators Research

& Management, 1058

Weil v. Seltzer, 307, 310Weissman, United States v., 1049Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Wrights Mill

Holdings, LLC, 388Welsh, United States v., 110, 841Werner v. Upjohn, Inc., 173, 174Wesela, United States v., 740, 745Westberry v. Gislaved Bummi AB, 499Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. City of

Burlington, Vermont, 1131Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Republic of

the Philippines, 1060Westmoreland, United States v., 421Wheeler v. United States, 75Whitaker Chalk Swindle & Sawyer, LLP

v. Dart Oil & Gas Corp., 1070, 1082White Bull, United States v., 840White v. Illinois, 849White, United States v. (7th Cir. 2011),

452White, United States v. (D.C. Cir. 1989),

1045Whitehurst v. Wright, 952Whitted, United States v., 771Whittemore, United States v., 30, 123Whorton v. Bockting, 857Wicks, United States v., 587Wilkus, United States v., 835Williams v. Illinois, 890Williams, United States v. (2d Cir.

2007), 718Williams, United States v. (6th Cir.



1984), 223, 615Williams, United States v. (7th Cir.

1998), 36, 586Williams, United States v. (D.C. Cir.

1992), 572Williamson v. United States, 700, 708Wilson v. Bicycle South, Inc., 68


xlviii TABLE OF CASES

Wilson v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 771, 784

Wilson, United States v. (5th Cir. 1984), 812

Wilson, United States v. (7th Cir. 1992), 32

Wiman, United States v., 976Winchenbach, United States v., 985Winkle, United States v., 38Winship, In re, 946Winters, United States v., 745Wolak v. Spucci, 321Wolf, United States v., 991Wood v. Alaska, 323Wood v. Morbark Indus., 182Wood, United States v., 663Woodcock, R. v., 697Wooden v. Missouri P. R. Co., 927Woodruff, United States v., 1037Woods v. Cook, 695Woods v. Lecureux, 16Woods, United States v., 581Workinger, United States v., 426Yakobov, United States v., 812

Yamin, United States v., 417Yates v. Bair Transp., Inc., 794Yazzie, United States v. (9th Cir. 1992),

444Yazzie, United States v. (9th Cir. 1995),

769Ybarra, United States v., 598Yeo, United States v., 967Yerardi, United States v., 1059Yielding, United States v., 581York, United States v., 835Yosemite Investment Inc. v. Floyd Bell

Inc., 1060Young, United States v. (2d Cir. 1984), 7Young, United States v. (8th Cir. 2014),

579Yu-Leung, United States v., 37Zayas, People v., 93Zenni, United States v., 594Zhu, United States v., 383Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC, 431,

1069Zuckerbraun v. General Dynamics

Corp., 1146


xlix

Preface to the Sixth Edition

This new edition was necessitated by a number of developments in the law of evidence. Changes include in ter est ing innovations by courts on questions of char-acter evidence and expert testimony; amendments to the Federal Rules of Evidence; issues involving the admissibility of electronic evidence; and innovations occurring as a result of the Covid epidemic and the possibility of remote trials.

Of course the casebook focuses on the Federal Rules of Evidence, as they were restyled in 2011. One of the authors of this book, Professor Daniel Capra, serves as Reporter to the Judicial Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules and so had front- line responsibility for the restyled rules. Another co- author, Professor Saltzburg, served as a con sul tant on the Restyling proj ect. Where pos si ble, the draf ters’ per-spective on the rulemaking pro cess has been emphasized.

Prior editions contained extensive transcripts raising evidentiary questions. These transcripts, with answers and explanations, are now placed in an Appendix at the end of the book.

A number of the principal cases in the book were de cided before the Restyled Rules of Evidence went into effect. Where those cases quote the language of the rule, we have tried to indicate that the quotation is from the rule before it was restyled. Editorial comments concerning restyling are contained in brackets in the cases. It is impor tant to note that none of the results in any of the cases would be changed by applying the Restyled Rule — because the very premise of the Restyling is that no substantive changes have been made.

A few words on the format of the book:

• Citations included in cases are usually omitted, without so specifying, in order to help with the readability of the opinion.

• Footnotes that are included in the cases are numbered as they were in the origi-nal case. Footnotes that are ours in the text are numbered sequentially from the beginning of each chapter.

• If we have deleted textual material from a case, it is noted with three aster-isks. If the court has deleted material — for example from a quote taken from another case — it is noted with three periods.

This edition continues the practice of the previous edition by including exten-sive excerpts from the Federal Rules of Evidence Manual, coauthored by Professors Stephen Saltzburg, Michael Martin, and Daniel Capra. We hope that these excerpts


l PREFACE TO THE SIXTH EDITION

will help students master the impor tant concepts of evidence that do not arise in the principal cases. We thank Lexis- Nexis for the permission to use this material. Extensive original note material is also included.

The co- authors owe a special debt of thanks to Professors Capra and Saltzburg, who spent countless hours in preparing new prob lems, finding new cases, and reworking and modernizing the material for this new edition.


li

Introduction: The Restyled Rules of Evidence

This edition of the casebook highlights the Restyled Rules of Evidence. The Judi-cial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure has led a decades-long effort to adopt clear and consistent style conventions for all of the national rules of procedure. The rules had been enacted without consistent style conventions, so there were differences from one set of rules to another, and even from one rule to another within the same set. Different rules expressed the same thought in different ways, leading to a risk that they would be interpreted differ-ently. Different rules sometimes used the same word or phrase to mean different things, again leading to a risk of misinterpretation. Drafters made no effort to write the rules in plain English.

Despite some initial opposition, each of the restyling projects has proved enor-mously successful — substantially assisting lawyers, judges and law students in understanding and applying the rules. The Restyled Evidence Rules have won legal writing awards, including a Clear Mark award for plain language and the Burton Award for Legal Reform.

The Process for Restyling the Evidence Rules

With the approval of the Chief Justice of the United States — the Chair of the Judicial Conference — the Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules undertook its restyling project beginning in the Fall of 2007. The Committee established a step-by-step process for restyling in compliance with previous restyling projects and with the Rules Enabling Act. Those steps involved multiple levels of drafting and review by the Evidence Rules Committee, the Style Subcommittee of the Standing Committee, as well as substantial input from judges, lawyers and academics.

Professor Capra, a co-author of this Casebook, served as the Reporter for the restyling. Professor Saltzburg, another co-author of this Casebook, served as a con-sultant to the Advisory Committee. Professor Joseph Kimble, a legal writing profes-sor, served as the principal restylist.

The most challenging part of the restyling process was to improve the style of the Evidence Rules without changing the substance. The Advisory Committee estab-lished a working definition of a substantive change — a proposed change is “sub-stantive” if:


lii INTRODUCTION: THE RESTYLED RULES OF EVIDENCE

• under the existing practice in any circuit, it could lead to a different result on a question of admissibility;

• under the existing practice in any circuit, it could lead to a change in the pro-cedure by which an admissibility decision is made; or

• it changes the structure of a rule or method of analysis in a manner that would fundamentally alter how courts and litigants have thought about, or argued about, the rule; or

• it changes what Professor Kimble has referred to as a “sacred phrase” — phrases that have become “so familiar as to be fixed in cement.”

Goals of RestylingThe restyling effort provides consistent terminology, plain language, and gener-

ally makes the Evidence Rules more user-friendly. That end-product results from many specific techniques applied consistently throughout the rules.

First, the restyled Evidence Rules use a special format to achieve clearer pre-sentations. The rules are broken down into constituent parts, using progressively indented subparagraphs with headings and substituting vertical for horizontal lists. “Hanging indents” are used throughout. These formatting changes make the struc-ture of the rules graphic and make the restyled rules easier to read and understand even when the words are not changed.

Second, the Restyled Rules reduce the use of inconsistent terms that say the same thing in different ways. Because different words are presumed to have different meanings, such inconsistencies can result in confusion. The restyled rules reduce inconsistencies by using the same words to express the same meaning. For example, consistent expression is achieved by not switching between “accused” and “defen-dant” or between “party opponent” and “opposing party” or between the various formulations of civil and criminal action/case/proceeding.

Third, the Restyled Rules minimize the use of inherently ambiguous words. For example, the word “shall” can mean “must,” “may,” or something else, depending on context. The potential for confusion is exacerbated by the fact the word “shall” is no longer generally used in spoken or clearly written English. The restyled rules replace “shall” with “must,” “may,” or “should,” depending on which one the con-text and established interpretation make correct in each rule.

Fourth, the Restyled Rules minimize the use of redundant “intensifiers.” These are expressions that attempt to add emphasis, but instead state the obvious and cre-ate negative implications for other rules.

Fifth, the Restyled Rules improve the drafting of the Evidence Rules by changing passive to active voice whenever possible; eliminating unnecessary, vague, or redun-dant language; and correcting inadvertent errors in the original rules.

Sixth, the Restyled Rules seek to accommodate technological advances in the presentation of evidence by including, in a new definitions section, language that defines written material to include material stored in electronic form.


INTRODUCTION: THE RESTYLED RULES OF EVIDENCE liii

Seventh, the Restyled Rules streamline the rules by placing recurring terms in the definition section so that those terms do not have to be fully stated in each rule.

Status of the Restyled Rules of EvidenceThe Restyled Rules of Evidence took effect on December 1, 2011.

The Restyled Rules and This CasebookMost of the cases included in this book were decided before the Restyled Rules

were enacted. When these cases quote a rule, they are of course quoting a pre-restyled rule. We have added bracketed material within the cases to remind the reader that the language used by the court is not the same as it is today. It must be remembered that even though the language used is often different, the result of the case will, by definition, not change — because the Restyled Rules change style only.


Evidence - Carolina Academic Press

Documents

Transcript of Evidence - Carolina Academic Press