What Is Hearsay in Criminal Court?

Hearsay is an out-of-court statement that is offered in court to prove that what the person said is true. In a criminal case, that could mean a witness repeating something they heard from someone else rather than testifying about what they personally saw or heard. Hearsay is generally excluded because the person who made the original statement is not available for the usual safeguards of testimony, including cross-examination. However, important exceptions allow certain out-of-court statements into evidence.

For legal help with a criminal case or questions about evidence, use the Super Lawyers directory to speak with a criminal defense attorney.

What Is Hearsay?

Under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(c), hearsay is a statement made out of court. That statement is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. However, not every out-of-court statement is hearsay. The purpose for which a statement is being presented is a crucial element. If a statement is presented to the court with another purpose, it may fall outside of the hearsay rule.

The declarant is the person who made the statement. A statement could be oral or written. In some situations, it could also be nonverbal conduct meant to convey a message.

Why Is Hearsay Generally Excluded?

Hearsay is excluded because of Federal Rule of Evidence 802. The hearsay rule screens out statements that lack the safeguards ordinarily associated with in-court testimony.

Admitting it creates several complications. The person who made the statement may not have been in court or under oath. The opposing side may not have an opportunity to question the person when the statement was made. The jury may not have adequate context and information to accurately evaluate the statement.

Why Is Some Hearsay Allowed in Court?

The hearsay rules of evidence aren’t a blanket ban on all out-of-court statements. Exceptions allow statements that are sufficiently reliable or necessary to justify their admission. This is especially important in a criminal trial or hearing.

Someone facing criminal charges could face life-changing consequences. In the interest of justice, certain types of hearsay must be admitted.

Common Hearsay Exceptions in Criminal Cases

Several exceptions to the hearsay rule allow different types of evidence to be admitted. However, an exception to the hearsay rule does not necessarily mean the evidence automatically comes in.

Another evidentiary rule may prevent its admission. An objection on grounds such as relevance, authentication, privilege, or constitutional protection may also prevent admission.

Present Sense Impressions

Statements that are made during an incident that describe or explain what is happening may qualify as a present sense impression. The statement must be made during or immediately after the person perceived what they are commenting on.

For example, a person watching a robbery immediately says, “That man just took the money.” The statement is made so close in time to the event that there is less opportunity for reflection or fabrication.

Excited Utterances

Similarly, an excited utterance is a statement a declarant makes while still under the stress of the event. The circumstances are crucial to this exception. These statements are considered more reliable because the person has little opportunity to reflect on the incident.

For example, immediately after witnessing a shooting, a person cries out, “He shot him!”

Statements Made for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment

Statements made for medical diagnosis or treatment that are reasonably pertinent to that diagnosis or treatment can qualify.

However, not every statement made to a doctor automatically qualifies. The rationale is that patients generally have a reason to provide accurate information to medical providers because it affects their care. For example, a victim of a crime tells their doctor how they were injured while seeking treatment.

Records of Regularly Conducted Activities

Under the business-record exception, records made and maintained as part of a regularly conducted activity may qualify when the rule’s requirements are satisfied.

Accurately documented records over a long period of time can show consistency and reliability. They can show a pattern of behavior to support other arguments.

Public Records

Certain records or statements of public offices and agencies can qualify when the rule’s requirements are met. Government records can be admissible because they are created as part of official duties under circumstances specified by the rule.

However, this exception has limits, especially when considering records of matters observed by law-enforcement personnel in criminal cases.

Statements Against Interest

This exception applies when the declarant is unavailable, and the statement was sufficiently against the declarant’s own interests when made. In a criminal case, a statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability has additional trustworthiness requirements.

People generally have less reason to fabricate statements that expose themselves to criminal liability.

Former Testimony

A declarant’s former testimony may be admitted when they are unavailable. The opposing party must have had an opportunity and similar motive to develop the testimony through examination.

The earlier proceeding provides procedural safeguards that can support reliability.

Statements Made Under Belief of Imminent Death

In a homicide prosecution, dying declarations can be admissible when they concern the cause or circumstances of the impending death. This exception applies in a homicide prosecution or in a civil case.

There are several requirements for admissibility. The declarant must be unavailable as a witness. The statement must have been made while the declarant believed their death was imminent. The statement must concern the cause or circumstances of what the declarant believed to be their impending death.

Courts have traditionally recognized that a person who believes they are about to die may have little reason to lie about what caused their impending death. The circumstances are considered a reason to trust the statement, even though the person cannot appear in court and be cross-examined.

Statements Offered Against a Party Who Caused the Unavailable Witness

A party generally cannot prevent someone from testifying and then object when that person’s earlier statements are offered in court. A statement may be admitted when the party against whom it is offered wrongfully caused, or acquiesced in causing, the declarant’s unavailability with the intent of preventing the person from testifying.

This exception can become particularly important when a defendant is accused of threatening, intimidating, or otherwise interfering with a witness. The rule is designed to prevent a party from creating the very problem that would otherwise keep the statement out of evidence.

What Is Not Hearsay?

Not every out-of-court statement is hearsay. The court must consider why the statement is being offered. A statement offered to show that something was said, for example, may be treated differently from a statement offered to prove that the information it contains is true.

Rule 801 also treats certain statements as not hearsay, including specific prior statements by a witness and statements made by or attributable to an opposing party. A defendant’s own statement, when offered against the defendant, can fall into the latter category.

Seek Legal Advice

A statement made outside court is not automatically hearsay, and hearsay is not automatically inadmissible. An attorney can review the specific hearsay evidence in your case and determine whether a hearsay objection or another evidentiary issue applies.

For legal help, use the Super Lawyers directory to find a criminal defense attorney.