A concise comparison of the federal and Virginia rules of evidence, reprinting (in full) the evidence code of each jurisdiction side-by-side, along with expert analysis of salient distinctions.
Comparisons of federal and state evidence rules can be immensely helpful to attorneys, judges, and law students who are often well versed in one set of rules, but not the other. As a result, book-length federal-to-state rule comparisons exist for most major United States jurisdictions. Virginia has until now been a notable exception.
For each rule of evidence, this book sets out the full text of the federal and corresponding Virginia rule, followed by a "Comparison and Commentary" section that (1) analyzes salient distinctions between the text of the federal and Virginia rule; (2) describes how those differences operate in application; and (3) highlights distinctions between the rules in application that may not be apparent from the rules' text. The "Comparison and Commentary" section also flags areas where the Virginia codifiers arguably went beyond Virginia case law in creating the codified rules, creating uncertainty as to the controlling evidence rule. Finally, the "Comparison and Commentary" sections reference (and reprint) a number of Virginia statutes that touch on evidentiary principles, but are either not completely captured within the relevant evidence rule or are not referenced at all in the evidence codification.
The book is intended for lawyers or law students who already possess an understanding of either Virginia or federal evidence law. This is a comparison of the two evidence codes, not a comprehensive analysis of either one. Non-lawyers or those with only a passing familiarity with evidence law will find many questions left unanswered. In addition, the book is short, just over 200 pages. To keep the volume manageable, only major distinctions are discussed.
