To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library





A. General Rule:

A statement made out-of-court is generally not admissible in court, if the statement is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the out-of-court statement.

B. Rationale:

The prohibition against the admission of hearsay evidence reflects a general policy concern with the integrity of the adversary system. Specific justifications for the hearsay rules include:

1. Declarant Cannot Be Cross-Examined:
An out-of-court declarant cannot be cross-examined. Without cross-examination, the fact finder cannot evaluate the accuracy of the out-of-court statement.

2. Declarant Not Under Oath:
The declarant was not under oath she made the out-of-court statement. Therefore, the statement lacks reliability. (NOTE: this policy concerns is also reflected by the general requirement of oath or affirmation as a condition of witness competence).

3. Possibility of Faulty Transmittal:
The witness may not accurately re-state the declarant’s oral statement.

4. Futility of Cross-Examination:
Cross-examination of the testifying witness will be futile since the testifying witness cannot testify as to declarant’s state of mind, intent, bias or motive.

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following