Also known as: hearsay rule · hearsay exclusionary rule
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A rule of evidence that excludes an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted unless the statement falls within a statutory exception, exclusion, or other rule of admissibility. The rule requires each layer of a multiple-hearsay statement to satisfy an exception independently. It also interacts with constitutional limits on testimonial statements in criminal cases.
Roberto Reyes was charged with assault after a fight at a bar. The victim died before trial. The prosecutor offered the victim's prior sworn deposition identifying Reyes as the attacker. The court admitted the deposition because the declarant was unavailable and the statement met the requirements for former testimony.
Riley Rivera sued Rising Sun Electronics after a product malfunction caused injury. A company email quoted an engineer's internal memo describing a known defect. The court admitted the email only after finding that both the engineer's memo and the email forwarding it each qualified under separate hearsay exceptions.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Rajesh Rao sought damages after a car accident. He offered a written statement from a now-deceased bystander describing the collision. The court admitted the statement under the residual exception because it carried sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness and was more probative than other available evidence.
Rhea Reynolds faced criminal charges based on statements her spouse made to police during a formal interview. The spouse did not testify at trial. The court excluded the statements because they were testimonial and the defendant had no prior opportunity for cross-examination.
Rosa Ruiz was prosecuted after a 911 caller described an ongoing assault. The caller did not appear at trial. The court admitted the statements because they were made during an ongoing emergency and were therefore nontestimonial.
Renee Rogers challenged the search of her home. Officers relied on statements from a third party claiming authority to consent. The court evaluated whether those statements established apparent authority without treating them as hearsay offered for their truth.
Each layer must independently qualify under an exception or exclusion. If any layer fails, the entire statement is inadmissible.
Supporting sources
A statement not covered by Rules 803 or 804 may still be admitted if it has sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness and is more probative than other reasonably obtainable evidence.
Supporting sources
Testimonial hearsay statements by unavailable declarants are inadmissible unless the defendant had a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
Supporting sources
Statements made to resolve an ongoing emergency are nontestimonial and may be admitted even if the declarant is unavailable.
Supporting sources
…opinion) ("[A]ccomplices' confessions that inculpate a criminal defendant are not within a firmly rooted exception to the hearsay rule").[^maj-7] IV Our case law has been largely consistent with these two principles. Our leading early decision, for example, involved a deceased witness's prior trial testimony.…