Opinion ID: 1631067
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Exclusion of reflective tape documents

Text: ś 61. Carla next argues that the trial court erred by excluding a number of documents concerning reflective tape. The documents contained information on reflective tape and its ability to prevent accidents. Carla asserts that the documents were used by her experts and as evidence of what reflective tape is, why it is used on trailers, and its cost. She claims that she was prejudiced when the trial court denied her experts the opportunity to use this information and/or allow evidence to be presented to the jury on the visibility issues. Carla identified the documents as P-9 through 20. [8] Exhibits P-9 and P-14 were admitted into evidence during the trial and, therefore, are not at issue before this Court. ś 62. The trial court excluded the other documents because they were prepared by private organizations, most were marketing devices, and they were hearsay. The trial court did not err by excluding the documents as hearsay. Hearsay is defined as a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Miss. R. Evid. 801. The documents, by Carla's own explanation, would be hearsay, as they would be used to prove the truth of the matter asserted, that being what constitutes reflective tape, why it is used, its cost, and its effects in connection with accidents. ś 63. Notwithstanding this, Carla was not prejudiced by the exclusion of these documents. The jury had the opportunity to view Exhibit 8 â the Effectiveness of Retro Reflective Tape on Heavy Trailers; Exhibit 9 â FMCSA's Conspicuity Requirements for Commercial Motor Vehicle, and Exhibit 14 â Recognizing a Truck at Night Shouldn't Be a Hit or Miss Proposition. In addition, Carla had Dunlap, Maxwell, and Corbitt give testimony concerning the purpose for reflective tape, the FMCSRs concerning reflective tape, whether the R & R truck had reflective tape, and how reflective tape, or lack thereof, could affect a person's ability to see a truck. The jury also had actual photographs depicting the R & R truck, taken at the scene on the night of the accident. Accordingly, the trial court did not err by excluding proposed documents P-10 through 13 and P-15 through 20.