Supreme Court of Maryland
Michael Joseph Bernadyn v. State of Maryland
December 8, 2005887 A.2d 602
Summary
The court held that the medical bill was hearsay because the State used the name and address on the bill to prove that Bernadyn lived at the searched residence. The bill was inadmissible because the State established no applicable hearsay exception, business-record foundation, or exception for the hearsay within hearsay concerning the source of the address. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Holding
- Whether the medical bill was hearsay when offered to prove that Bernadyn lived at the searched address.. The bill was hearsay because its name-and-address information was a written assertion that Bernadyn lived at 2024 Morgan Street, and the State offered it to prove the truth of that assertion.
- Whether the bill was admissible under the business-record exception or another exception to the hearsay rule.. The bill was not admissible under the business-record exception because the State supplied no evidence establishing the required business-record foundation and no exception for the hearsay within hearsay concerning the source of the address.
Docket 91, September Term, 2003
Cited authorities
- Rule 803(6)
- rule 803(6)
- Rule 803(6)
- Fed. R. Evid. 801(a)
- 65 Minn. L. Rev. 423
- 87 Harv. L. Rev. 957
- Fed. R. Evid. 803
- 24 U. Balt. L. Rev. 27