CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Hearsay Exceptions re Statements
......Prior Consistent Statements
.........Rebut Charge of Recent Fabrication
 12 Cards On This Topic:
  • W's statement re D's story as to why he had V's credit cards properly admitted where D asserted bias/motive for fabrication, W's statement was consistent with his trial testimony and he made it before any promises not to prosecute.
  • Accomplice's consistent statement properly admitted where made before plea bargain was struck and thus before the existence of one of the grounds alleged in D's charge that accomplice's trial testimony was biased.
  • Accomplice's taped statement re conspiracy, made during police interview, properly admitted as prior consistent statement where made before suggested improper motive arose.
  • Statement which accomplice made after crime but before arrest may be used as prior consistent statement to rebut implied charge that he fabricated it to get lighter sentence.
  • Prior consistent statement admissible if made before existence of bias or motives that may have influenced witness' testimony; no denial of confrontation rights.
  • Implication that witness lied during direct exam is sufficient to introduce witness' prior consistent statement when prior statements made before motive for fabrication is alleged to have arisen.
  • If DA's witness is in custody, asking if he expects to receive leniency from DA for testifying equates to charge of improper motive permitting admission of prior consistent statements.
  • Asking DA's witness whether he is facing prison term is sufficient to justify introduction of prior consistent statement.
  • O may testify to V's prior consistent statement re uncertain lineup ID to dispel contention V's testimony at trial recently fabricated.
  • Recent fabrication from silence properly inferred; prior consistent statement properly admitted to overcome charge.
  • Prior consistent statements properly excluded when evidence suggests only that witness mistaken as to facts, and not any bias or motive to fabricate.
  • Out-of-court consistent statements made after alleged motive for fabrication arose are not admissible under FRE 801(d)(1)(B).


    •