Also known as: out-of-court statement · out of court statement · out of court statements · hearsay statement
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A statement made outside the current trial or hearing and offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Such statements trigger the hearsay rule unless they qualify for an exclusion or exception.
Oscar Ortiz offers a recorded interview by a deceased employee to prove a safety defect. Orion Technologies responds by introducing the employee's earlier contradictory email. The court admits the email to impeach the absent declarant's credibility even though the employee never testified.
Owen Ortega faces trial for assault. The prosecution offers a formal affidavit given by the victim to police describing the attack. Because the victim is unavailable and Ortega never cross-examined her, the court excludes the affidavit.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Octavia Okonkwo sues for breach after a supplier's email admits defective goods. The supplier is unavailable. The court admits the email under the residual exception because it carries strong guarantees of trustworthiness and is more probative than other available evidence.
Oliver Okeke, defense counsel, tells reporters that the prosecution's key witness is lying. The bar seeks discipline under a vague publicity rule. The court holds that the First Amendment protects the out-of-court statements because the rule fails to give fair notice.
Odin Obeng and Orson Ochoa plan a fraud. During the scheme Obeng tells a third party that Ochoa will handle the false invoices. The statement is admitted against Ochoa because it was made in furtherance of the ongoing conspiracy.
Olympus Banking employee calls 911 during an ongoing robbery and describes the gunman. The court admits the call because the statements were made to resolve an emergency rather than to create testimony for trial.
A statement qualifies as hearsay when the declarant does not make it while testifying at the current trial or hearing and a party offers it to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
Rule 806 permits any evidence that would be admissible to attack or support the credibility of a declarant if the declarant had testified, including inconsistent statements regardless of timing or opportunity to explain.
A statement is testimonial when made under circumstances that would lead an objective witness to believe it would be used at a later trial, such as formal statements to government officers.
A court may admit the statement if it has sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness, is more probative than other reasonably obtainable evidence, and the proponent gave proper advance notice.
…mean that it has no application to such statements. This Court has long held that the right of confrontation does not apply to out-of-court statements that are not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. The text of the Confrontation Clause reflects this focus. It applies to “witnesses” against the accused—those who bear…