Also known as: reads into · reading into · read in · reading in
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
An evidentiary procedure by which a witness recites aloud the contents of a qualifying record or statement directly into the trial transcript. The procedure applies only when the record meets the foundational requirements of the applicable hearsay exception. The document itself may not be received as an exhibit unless offered by an adverse party.
A method of construing a text by supplying an unstated term, limitation, or implication to effectuate the document's purpose or structure. The method requires that the supplied element be reasonably consistent with the text when read as a whole.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
An evidentiary procedure by which a witness recites aloud the contents of a qualifying record or statement directly into the trial transcript. The procedure applies only when the record meets the foundational requirements of the applicable hearsay exception. The document itself may not be received as an exhibit unless offered by an adverse party.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Renee Rogers testified she could not recall the details of a pesticide application. Elena offered the contemporaneous field log. The court permitted Renee to read the log entry into the record but refused to admit the document itself as an exhibit because the proponent offered it.
Tanya relied on the Property Inspection Manual during direct examination. Defense counsel confronted her with additional statements on cross. The court allowed Tanya to read the passages into evidence after she acknowledged the Manual's common professional use but barred admission of the Manual as an exhibit.
The record must concern a matter the witness once knew but now cannot recall well enough to testify fully and accurately. It must have been made or adopted when the matter was fresh in memory and must accurately reflect the witness's knowledge. If these elements are met, the witness may read the record into evidence.
Supporting sources
No. The rule permits the record to be read into evidence but allows it to be received as an exhibit only if offered by an adverse party. This limitation prevents the proponent from giving the document undue emphasis in the jury room.
Supporting sources
A method of construing a text by supplying an unstated term, limitation, or implication to effectuate the document's purpose or structure. The method requires that the supplied element be reasonably consistent with the text when read as a whole.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Roland Rhodes challenged his conviction on the ground that officers obtained a confession without warnings. The court held that the Constitution requires officers to inform suspects of certain rights before custodial interrogation, supplying those procedural safeguards to protect the privilege against self-incrimination.
Rajesh Rao objected when the city condemned his property for transfer to a private developer. The court construed the public-use requirement to encompass economic-development plans that promise public benefits, thereby permitting the taking even though the government would not itself operate the resulting facilities.
The evidentiary use is a mechanical procedure for introducing a record through a witness's oral recitation. The interpretive use supplies an unstated term or implication to give effect to a constitutional, statutory, or contractual text when read as a whole.
Supporting sources
…competing considerations seems to me ample proof that the Court's preference is highly debatable at best and therefore not to be read into the Constitution. However, it may make the analysis more graphic to consider the actual facts of one of the four cases reversed by the Court. Miranda v. Arizona serves best, being neither…
…in the Federal and State Constitutions Which Protect “Life, Liberty, and Property,” 4 Harv. L. Rev. 365, 382 (1890). When read in light of the history of that formulation, it is hard to see how the “liberty” protected by the Clause could be interpreted to include anything broader than freedom from physical restraint.…
…United States or of the State, and that Courts should be careful not to extend such prohibitions beyond their obvious meaning by reading into them conceptions of public policy that the particular Court may happen to entertain." 273 U. S., at 446. [^maj-31]: Compare Nicchia v. New York , 254 U. S. 228, 231, upholding a New York…
…extending to "[c]onvenience" or "help," or "[q]ualities that make a thing proper for any purpose." 2 Johnson 2194. Nevertheless, read in context, the term "public use" possesses the narrower meaning. Elsewhere, the Constitution twice employs the word "use," both times in its narrower sense. Claeys, Public-Use Limitations and…
…to codify does not require, or even invite, the pleading of facts. The “pleading standard” label the majority gives to what it reads into
The statement must be called to the attention of an expert on cross-examination or relied on by the expert on direct examination. The publication must be established as a reliable authority by the expert's testimony, another expert's testimony, or judicial notice. The statement may then be read into evidence but not received as an exhibit.
Supporting sources
No. The rule expressly provides that the statement may be read into evidence but may not be received as an exhibit. The limitation ensures the jury considers the statement only in conjunction with the expert's testimony rather than as an independent document.
Supporting sources
Rita Russell challenged a state ban on contraceptive counseling. The court interpreted the Due Process Clause to protect a zone of marital privacy that encompasses decisions about contraception, invalidating the prohibition as an unwarranted intrusion on that liberty.
Ryan Roberts alleged parallel conduct by telecom carriers but supplied no facts showing an actual agreement. The court read Rule 8 to require enough factual matter to suggest a plausible right to relief, dismissing the complaint because the allegations remained consistent with lawful independent action.