12 (1992) (“trial court erred in precluding admission of the statements because they were either nonhearsay or admissible under a hearsay exception”) State v. 462 (1992) (statement properly admitted to show state of mind) State v. 26 (1997) (recording of statements made in 911 call was admissible for nonhearsay purpose of showing that call took place and that the accomplice was the caller) State v. 1 (1998) (statements about defendant being fired were offered for nonhearsay purpose of showing motive) State v. 193 (1999) (statements made to victim about getting a divorce were not offered for truth of the matter) State v. 144 (2011) (statements in detective’s interview with defendant about what other witnesses allegedly saw defendant do were not hearsay, because they were offered for the nonhearsay purpose of giving context to the defendant’s answers and explaining the detective’s interview technique) State v. 850 (2017) (witness’s statement that jailer told her the defendant was in an adjacent cell was not hearsay, because it was offered for the nonhearsay purpose of explaining why the witness was afraid to testify) State v. Not Offered for the TruthĪ declarant’s statement is not excluded as hearsay under Rule 801 if it is not being offered for the truth of the matter asserted (i.e., “the defendant did X”), but rather for some other permissible purpose such as explaining the defendant’s motive or showing the victim’s state of mind (e.g., “I was scared of the defendant because I heard he did X”). Several of the most common examples of these kinds of statements are summarized below. In addition to the statutory hearsay exceptions listed above, there are many situations in which the statement of a declarant is admissible simply because it does not fall within the scope of Rule 801 and therefore it is not subject to exclusion. For information about hearsay evidence that is admissible as an exception based on the unavailability of the declarant, see the related Evidence entry regarding Hearsay Exeptions.For information about hearsay evidence that is admissible as an exception regardless of the availability of the declarant, see the related Evidence entry regarding Hearsay Exceptions.For information about hearsay evidence that is admissible as an admission of a party-opponent, see the related Evidence entry regarding Admission of a Party Opponent.The statutory exceptions that allow hearsay to be admitted into evidence are addressed in the following entries: 55 (1986) (declarant’s gesture, in response to officer’s question, of pointing to the drawer where knife could be found was nonverbal conduct intended as an assertion, and therefore inadmissible as hearsay). 273 (1993) (“Howell's actions of attempting to give Horton the tape player and later attempting to give him a twenty-dollar bill were nonverbal assertions also constituting hearsay”) State v. 320 (2002) (testimony from one witness about whether another witness had pointed anyone out in a mug shot book was inadmissible hearsay) State v. Pursuant to Rules 801(a) and 802, the prohibition against hearsay testimony also applies to nonverbal conduct of the declarant (such as a nod or gesture), if that conduct is intended as an assertion. For example, if a trial witness such as a law enforcement officer attempted to testify about what an eyewitness at the scene of the crime said that he or she saw, and that statement was offered to establish that the events transpired as the witness reported, the statement would be inadmissible hearsay unless another statute or rule authorized the admission of the statement. Hearsay is not admissible except as provided by statute or by these rules.Įvidence is “hearsay” if it is a statement (that is, an “assertion,” either oral or written), made by the declarant (i.e., the person who made the statement) at any time or place other than while testifying in court at the current trial or hearing, and the statement is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Note: Rule 801(d) is covered separately in the next entry on “Admission of a Party Opponent.” "Hearsay" is 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. A "declarant" is a person who makes a statement. A "statement" is (1) an oral or written assertion or (2) nonverbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by him as an assertion. The following definitions apply under this Article:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |