Home › Mississippi › Rules of Evidence › Rule 106

Court Rules Network • courtrules.net

Miss. R. Evid. 106

Not legal advice. Verify against official sources before relying on this text in any legal matter.

Rule 106 Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded Statements

Article I: General Provisions

← Previous Rule 105: Limiting Evidence That Is Not Admissible Against Other Parties or for Other Purposes Next → Rule 201: Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

Rule Text

If a party introduces all or part of a writing or recorded statement, an adverse party may require the introduction, at that time, of any other part – or any other writing or recorded statement – that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time.

[Restyled effective July 1, 2016.]

Plain-English Summary (for reference only — not a substitute for the rule text above)

This summary is not the rule. The rule text controls.

When one side in a court case brings up part of a document or recording, the other side has the right to ask that the rest of it come in too. This stops people from taking things out of context and making them sound different from what they really mean.

For example, if a lawyer reads one sentence from a letter, the other side can ask for the full letter or at least the parts needed to explain that sentence fairly. This has to happen right away, at the same time the first part is introduced, not later in the trial.

The point of this rule is fairness. It makes sure the jury or judge gets the complete picture instead of a misleading snippet. Either side can use this rule, but it only applies to the same piece of evidence being discussed. It does not let someone bring in completely unrelated documents just because one document was mentioned.

Committee Notes

Advisory Committee Historical Note

Effective July 1, 2016, the Rule was amended as part of the general restyling of the Evidence Rules.

Effective June 16, 2016, the “Comment” was retitled “Advisory Committee Note.”

Advisory Committee Note

The language of Rule 106 has been amended as part of the restyling of the Evidence Rules to make them more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.

This rule is a codification of the common law doctrine of completeness. The rule is already codified with regard to depositions in M.R.C.P. 32(a)(4). However, Rule 106 is somewhat narrower than Mississippi common law. The rule only applies the doctrine of completeness to written or recorded statements of a specific document. Under Mississippi case law the rule of completeness is extended to other writings and even to oral statements. See Davis v. State, 230 Miss. 183, 92 So. 2d 359 (1957); Sanders v. State, 237 Miss. 772, 115 So. 2d 145

(1969) . Such a rule attempts to prevent misleading the jury by taking evidence out of context.

[“Advisory Committee Note” substituted for “Comment,” effective June 16, 2016; amended July 1, 2016, to note restyling.]

ARTICLE II. JUDICIAL NOTICE

← Previous Rule 105: Limiting Evidence That Is Not Admissible Against Other Parties or for Other Purposes Next → Rule 201: Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts