Miles Guo Court Documents · Doc 371

摘要

Government Response · Hearsay Objections and Hypothetical Questions

This seven-page letter, dated June 2, 2024 from the Assistant U.S. Attorneys, responds to two distinct evidentiary issues at trial in United States v. Guo, S3 23 Cr. 118 (AT):

1. The defendant's letter regarding hearsay objections (Dkt. 368, case-doc-368), filed May 29, 2024;
2. The admissibility of hypothetical questions posed to witnesses other than victims (transcript reference Tr. 975, where the Court requested authority from the government).

The Court invited the government's response at Tr. 578.

I. Hearsay

The government outlines applicable principles:

• Statements offered for the truth of the matter asserted are presumptively hearsay (FRE 801);
• A defendant's own out-of-court statements offered against him are not hearsay (FRE 801(d)(2)(A));
• A defendant cannot use the hearsay rules as a one-way door to introduce his own self-serving statements through a different witness, where those statements are not subject to a hearsay exception;
• Cross-examination must operate within the same hearsay constraints as direct examination.

The government applies these principles to the specific defense cross-examination conduct addressed in Dkt. 368.

II. Hypothetical Questions to Non-Victim Witnesses

The government provides authority on the admissibility of hypothetical questions, arguing that:

• Hypothetical questions to investors who claim not to be victims are improperly designed to elicit opinion testimony irrelevant to the elements of the charged offenses;
• The Court should restrict such questions consistent with the broader preclusion arguments in case-doc-385.