Opinion ID: 456244
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Verbal Acts

Text: 16 For the first two conversations listed above, the court instructed: 17 The conversation ... has been offered and received in evidence for the limited purposes of showing that the conversation took place and showing the sequence of events. The statements should not be considered by you for any other purpose. 18 As the government asserts, the conversations between Hake and Judge Devine were not hearsay because they were not offered for the truth of the matters asserted. See Fed.R.Evid. 801(c) (defining hearsay). The court admitted them as verbal acts and as an establishment of the ... background and continuity and explanation of the subsequent taped conversations. 19 This evidence is significant only when combined with other evidence of Conn's relationship with Judge Devine. It showed that meetings occurred during which Devine instructed Hake to see Conn. The relationship between the two public officials was explained. The evidence was properly admitted.