Also known as: hearsay exemptions · hearsay exception · non-hearsay
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A category of out-of-court statements that the Federal Rules of Evidence either exclude from the hearsay definition or admit under an exception when the declarant is unavailable or the statement carries sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness.
Hana Huang offers Elena's account of Antonio's statements about safety overrides at a gas facility. Antonio died in an unrelated accident before trial. The proponent shows that reasonable efforts to locate and bring Antonio to court failed despite his death rendering him unavailable.
Hassan Hakim seeks to introduce a coworker's report of Gabriel's admission about banned pesticide use. Gabriel is unavailable because he cannot be located despite diligent search. The proponent demonstrates that process and other reasonable means failed to secure Gabriel's attendance or testimony.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Hilda Hernandez offers a structural engineer's notes from a property inspection manual to support her negligence claim against a building manager. The notes are more probative than other available evidence on inspection standards. The court finds sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness from the manual's widespread professional use and corroborating circumstances.
Hugo Hart introduces a farmhand's text describing a plan to conceal banned pesticide barrels. The text was sent while the farm owner and farmhand actively coordinated the concealment. The court treats the statement as admissible because it occurred during and in furtherance of the joint activity.
Hannah Hale offers an expert's testimony that incorporates a DNA laboratory report linking the defendant to a crime scene sample. The expert explains the report's conclusions without calling the analyst. The court permits the testimony because the report supplies the basis for the expert's independent opinion.
Hakeem Harris faces trial for assault. The prosecution offers a spouse's recorded police statement describing the incident. The spouse refuses to testify and the defendant never cross-examined her. The court excludes the statement because it is testimonial and lacks a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
Unavailability exists when the declarant cannot be present or testify because of death, infirmity, or absence that the proponent could not overcome by reasonable efforts to procure attendance or testimony. The specific procurement requirement varies depending on which subsection of Rule 804(b) supplies the exception.
Rule 807 permits admission of a hearsay statement not covered by Rules 803 or 804 when the statement has sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness after considering the totality of circumstances and when it is more probative on the point than other reasonably obtainable evidence.
No. Even when a statement qualifies under a hearsay exemption or exception, the Confrontation Clause separately requires that the declarant be unavailable and that the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant if the statement is testimonial.
The prosecution must establish both that the declarant is unavailable at trial and that the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant about the statement. Traditional hearsay exceptions cannot substitute for the missing cross-examination opportunity.
…statement was inadmissible under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, it was admissible under a “firmly rooted” hearsay exception for statements against penal interest and that admitting it did not violate the Constitution. We granted certiorari to determine whether the State’s use of Sylvia’s statement violated the…