← back to the Substrate Record

qid 1756 · law

Question: A victim was standing on a street corner waiting to make a drug buy. The drug dealer was always late, so the victim continued to wait outside in the freezing cold weather because he needed a quick fix. Suddenly a car rounded the street corner and a shot rang out. The victim slumped over and fell to the sidewalk. Immediately after being shot and before he died, the victim exclaimed, "The defendant did it!" The defendant was indicted and is now on trial for the victim's murder. Based on these facts alone, the admissibility of the victim's statement should be determined by

  1. the jury, after a preliminary determination by the judge.
  2. the jury, without a preliminary determination by the judge.
  3. the judge, only after consultation with a legal expert.
  4. the judge, with instruction to the jury that it may consider the dying declaration if it determines that the victim knew he was dying.
  5. the police department that conducted the initial investigation.
  6. the jury, with instruction from the judge that it may disregard the dying declaration if it determines the victim was under duress.
  7. the jury, with a requirement to cross-examine the statement with other presented evidence.
  8. the judge, without assistance from the jury.
  9. a third-party mediator, to prevent any bias.

Our answer: H. the judge, without assistance from the jury. Source quote machine-checked (exact quote)

A machine check confirms the quoted words appear at the source. A person has not yet reviewed these. EARN MARKS as a Human Reviewer

How it was answered

Stored method, replayed by code (kind: formula)

card: formula · card sha256 363925cef6d01ba4…

Current source

Advisory Committee Notes to Federal Rule of Evidence 104 (quoting McCormick), as reproduced at courtrules.net

https://www.courtrules.net/federal/evidence/rule-104

““Should the exclusionary law of evidence, ‘the child of the jury system’ in Thayer’s phrase, be applied to this hearing before the judge? Sound sense backs the view that it should not, and that the judge should be empowered to hear any relevant evidence, such as affidavits or other reliable hearsay.””

Source quote machine-checked (exact quote)

retrieved 2026-09-18T00:33:49.092Z

page text sha256 7b274f9a0a4c4aa5… · content sha256 a02eb9d4a37a5018…

addendum formula_qid1756.formula_ADDENDUM_source_rs20260918T003349Z · sha256 c82a71df6df4f2b9… · replaces the version below, addendum sha256 6804c147d4c440f4…

Earlier version (superseded)

No public source has been found for this card yet (3 places checked internally).

addendum formula_qid1756.formula_ADDENDUM_source · sha256 6804c147d4c440f4…

If you have a Citable Source to dispute or challenge this, ADD IT so we can correct the answer by appending, never deleting. — hello@lianabanyan.com