Purchase Solution

Inadmissible or Admissible Testimony and Evidence

Not what you're looking for?

Ask Custom Question

Tommy "Two Toes" D'Natalia has a certified public accountant (CPA). He has been using his accountant to wash ill-gotten gains through his racketeering. The SAC has a subpoena for the CPA. D'Natalia is claiming privileged communication with his CPA, and it prohibits the accountant from testifying.

Luigi "the Pipe" Cardone heard through the "grapevine" that Big Sal Salvatore has been telling everyone how he was told by Frankie "the Lip" Bonnano that Freddie "Fingers" Malone was murdered by his wife Slippery Sally Genovese-Malone. Cardone wants a deal to testify against Slippery Sally.

Lawrence 'Lucky' Livorno drove the getaway car for a jewelry store heist. Bertram "Bugsy" Bertoli and Little Carmine D'Angelo went in and robbed the store. During the robbery, Bertoli shot and killed the store owner. D'Angelo and Livorno both want to testify to avoid the death penalty.:

Which testimony is hearsay and likely to be inadmissible?
Which testimony is privileged communication and which is not?
Identify how the "Best Evidence Rule" functions in relationship to the witness testimony being proffered.

Purchase this Solution
Solution Summary

This solution provides a brief explanation for the hearsay, privileged communication, and best evidence rule. It is situated so as to allow the student to effectively evaluate different sections of a scenario to determine the applicability of each rule to each section. It broadens the students scope of inquiry and allows for more investigation.

Solution Preview

Hearsay testimony is inadmissible because it is a statement made by a witness out of the realm of court, and the opportunity to cross examine the person who made the statement cannot be accomplished. Therefore, the statement made for evidentiary purposes is inadmissible.

Privileged communication is a conversation in the context of a protected relationship. Relationships such as Attorney/client, ...

Purchase this Solution
Free BrainMass Quizzes
Title VII

This Quiz pertains to the spectrum of Human Rights through Title VII

Evidence

Do you know your evidence objections? Find out with this quiz!

Title VII Laws

Learn the basics of the laws under Title VII.

Constitutional Law Rights

How much do you know about Constitutional Law Rights? Find out with this quiz!

Contract Requirments

How much do you know about the legal requirements for a contract? Find out with this quiz!

View More Free Quizzes
Related BrainMass Solutions

  • Polygraph Testing: Frye or Daubert

    This solution refers to the two cases and discusses whether polygraph testimony should be admissible in court, which test (Frye or Daubert) is more appropriate and the potential effect this testimony could have on a given case.

  • Federal Rules of Evidence and Impeaching a Witness

    The pendency of an appeal therefrom does not render evidence of a conviction inadmissible. Evidence of the pendency of an appeal is admissible.

  • The Admissibility of Character Evidence in trial

    2) Give 3 examples of a situation where character evidence is inadmissible in a criminal trial.

  • "relevant" or "irrelevant" when applied to evidence

    Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 402 states that, "Relevant evidence is generally admissible; irrelevant evidence is inadmissible" (www.law.cornell.edu).

  • Grocery's Business: Warranties

    Anything outside of a written contract is parol evidence, whether it is testimony about what was said during contract negotiations, proposals or letters memorializing conversations.The parol evidence rule states that parol evidence is not admissible to

  • DNA Testing

    testimony should be admissible in court, which test (Frye or Daubert) is more appropriate, and the potential effect this testimony could have on a given case. In Frye v.

  • Confession

    Confessions inadmissible for failure to comply with the Miranda warnings (cannot use in case in chief) may be admitted to impeach the credibility of the defendant's trial testimony. In Miranda v.

  • Admissible Evidence in Criminal Law

    These are unique and are admissible as evidence provided the weapon that fired the bullets is available or is identified as that belonging to the defendant.

  • The Polygraph Test

    Discuss whether polygraph testimony should be admissible in court, which test (Frye or Daubert) is more appropriate, and the potential effect this testimony could have on a given case. Polygraph: Daubert or Frye? In 1993, the case of Daubert vs.

View More Related Solutions