Write a 10–12 page paper that addresses all of the
Discuss the relevance of the Rape Shield Law and FRE 412 in the
case of Summitt v. State Supreme Court of Nevada (1985).
Read Weil v. Seltzer, United
States Court of Appeals, D.C. (1989) and discuss the issue of habit and routine
practice as it relates to FRE 406.
Discuss the issue of hearsay FRE 801(a)-(c) as held in the
opinion of Commonwealth v. Farris, Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Discuss the issue of excited utterance FRE 803 (2) as it relates
to the City of Dallas v. Donovan, Court of Appeals Texas
(PLEASE NOTE: This essay will require outside
research. Use at least two resources in addition to the text.)
You may consult the Library, the internet, the textbook, other
course material, and any other outside resources (at least 2) in supporting
your task, using proper citations in APA style.
Topic: Discuss the relevance of the Rape Shield Law and FRE 412 in the case of Summitt v. State Supreme Court of Nevada (1985).
Paper type: Research Paper
Number of soruces:
CJ508 Week 4 Assignment
The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) play a critical rule during civil and criminal trials. Particularly, the FRE presents a set of rules that guide and govern how testimonies and potential evidence during criminal and civil trials are to be introduced during court trials specifically in the United States. The FRE exists as eleven articles each article guiding how to handle a specific category of evidence starting from article I of general provisions to article XI that addresses issues relating to miscellaneous rules (Federal Rules of Evidence, 2020). The assignment explores the use of the FRE rules 412, 406, FRE 803, and 801(a)-(c) based on four trial proceedings namely the Summitt v. State Supreme Court of Nevada, Weil v. Seltzer, City of Dallas v. Donovan, and Commonwealth v. Farris.
The Relevance of the Rape Shield Law and FRE 412 in the Case of Summitt v. State Supreme Court of Nevada (1985)
The Summitt v. State Supreme Court of Nevada is a trial proceeding where the defendant, Vernon Summitt, is charged for sexually assaulting a six-year-old girl. Summitt was charged on the accounts for fellatio and cunnilingus. The defendant wanted to introduce evidence of the girl’s prior sexual acts that included fellatio, but the sexual acts did not include cunnilingus. However, the district court declined the introduction of the evidence which the court noted was against the state’s rape shield law, which limited the use of prior evidence of sexual acts in a sexual assault case. Consequently, after weighing the presented evidence, the jury found the defendant guilty and convicted him of two counts of sexual assault. Summitt however appealed