Rules of Evidence: Hearings, Ninety-third Congress, First Session
United States. Congress. House. Committee on the Judiciary. Special Subcommittee on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973 - Court rules - 589 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
accused action admissible admitted adopted Advisory Committee allow amendment appears apply Association authority believe called Chairman changes character civil claim Code communication concerning conduct Congress considered constitutional conviction counsel course crime criminal cross-examination decision defendant determination direct disclosure District draft effect examination exception existing expert fact federal courts Federal Rules further give given hearing hearsay House impeachment inconsistent indicate interest issue judge judicial Judiciary jury Justice lawyer limited litigation March matter Note objection offered officer opinion opportunity original party permit person position practice present presumption prior privilege problem Procedure proceedings proposed rule prove question reason recognized recommend record reference relating relevant Representatives respect result Rules of Evidence seems specific stand statement statute Subcommittee subdivision submitted substantial suggested Supreme Court testify testimony tion trial truth United Washington witness writing
Page 5 - Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.
Page 122 - The head of each department is authorized to prescribe regulations, not inconsistent with law, for the government of his department, the conduct of its officers and clerks, the distribution and performance of its business, and the custody, use. and preservation of the records, papers, and property appertaining to it.
Page 59 - Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference of the United States, to which the various advisory committees report.
Page 384 - A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, unless the source of information...
Page 251 - The court shall exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to (1) make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth, (2) avoid needless consumption of time, and (3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
Page 325 - ... (8) contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions; or (9) geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells.
Page 162 - ... a juror may testify on the question whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury's attention or whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror.
Page 154 - Except as otherwise required by the Constitution of the United States or provided by Act of Congress or in rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority, the privilege of a witness, person, government, State, or political subdivision thereof shall be governed by the principles of the common law as they may be interpreted by the courts of the United States in the light of reason...
Page 367 - When, after an event, measures are taken which, if taken previously, would have made the event less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct in connection with the event.