When is a police report admissible in a traffic offense trial under the business records exception?

A police report is never admissible as substantive evidence against the accused. It can be used to cross-examine the officer or refresh a recollection, but only the officer's testimony is evidence against the accused, not the report.

Co-counsel is absolutely right. There are certain ways that one can move the police report into evidence. For example you can stipulate (agree with your adversary) to its admissibility. However, given the fact that you got charged, I cannot imagine that too much of the police report would be in your favor. Most police reports are written, and then edited by a supervisor, in a light most favorable to the police. So be careful of what you ask for. Second, if you are not an attorney can you represent yourself — absolutely. If you are not a doctor can you perform open heart surgery on yourself — absolutely. Just make sure you are prepared for the result.

What are you trying to have it admitted into evidence for? The document itself may be admissible under the business records exception, however it's contents likely would not be admissible. Most police reports contain statements, admissions, or quotes of people the police officer spoke with at the scene. Anything contained in the report that was said by someone that has not testified in court, would be considered hearsay, and would excluded as hearsay. So, if you were in a car accident, and the officer spoke to you, the other driver and a witness, what the other driver and witness told the officer would be hearsay. If you want to get the statements in, you need to bring the parties in to court to testify...or find an applicable exception to the hearsay rule. The rules of evidence are complicated. A Google search or quick research won't do the trick. Law students spend an entire semester in law school taking a course in evidence, and we still learn more as we continue in our practice. The New Jersey Rules of Evidence with Comments and Amendments is more than 900 pages long. You should seriously consider consulting and/or hiring an attorney to navigate through the trial process.

I agree with my colleagues. The report may be admissible to show one was written, (if contested) but not the contents. It could be admitted under rare circumstances as past recollection recorded. The contents can be testified to and used by the cop to refresh recollection. Even then he cannot read from it or even look at it unless he indicates he does not recall an answer and the report can refresh his recollection.