In the case, Davis v. State, the defendant had been convicted of two counts of capital murder. One of the victims was permitted to offer to a witness and to a paramedic a detailed story of what the defendant did to her with respect to dousing her with gasoline and setting her on fire. She appeared to be concerned about her children that she might leave after her death, and the paramedic indicated that it was clear to him that she would not survive. The defendant contended that the victim's dying declaration should not have been admitted. The Supreme Court of Florida concluded that:
A) dying declarations in the state of Florida could no longer be admitted against the defendants because there was no opportunity to cross-examine the declarant due to the death of the declarant at an earlier time.
B) this particular dying declaration should not have been admitted because the victim did not utter the fact that she knew she was going to die quickly.
C) dying declarations are admissible in Florida courts because they are not considered hearsay.
D) the dying declaration was properly admitted because the victim clearly understood that she would not live very long, and the fact that the defendant could not cross-examine her did not prevent the use of the dying declaration.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q33: A dying declaration is a statement by
Q34: An accused has a federal constitutional right
Q35: A dying declaration, in order to be
Q36: A declaration against the interests of the
Q37: When a police officer takes the stand
Q38: In some instances, evidence is offered not
Q39: In the case of Bell v. State,
Q40: In the case of Cox v. State,
Q41: In Gonzalez v. State, the Texas defendant
Q43: In the case of Michigan v. Washington,
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents