Flashcards Studio

Defendant is charged in federal court with robbing a pharmacy. The cashier, Vega, testifies at trial that she cannot identify the robber because the robber wore a mask and she was frightened. Vega is subject to cross-examination.
The government offers three prior statements by Vega. First, one week after the robbery, Vega identified Defendant in a properly conducted photo array and signed a form stating, "That is the robber." Second, at a preliminary hearing under oath, Vega testified that Defendant was the robber. Third, two days before trial, after meeting with prosecutors, Vega told her sister, "I am certain it was Defendant." Defense counsel argues that the government pressured Vega after plea discussions with Defendant failed and that all three statements are hearsay.
How should the court analyze the three prior statements? Discuss Rule 801(d)(1), substantive use, impeachment or rehabilitation, and any timing issues.