Present Sense Impressions and Hearsay under Evidence Law
Present Sense Impressions and Hearsay Under Evidence Law
1. Understanding Hearsay
Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. Because the declarant (the person who made the statement) is not present in court to be cross-examined, hearsay is generally inadmissible due to concerns over reliability.
2. Present Sense Impressions: An Exception to Hearsay
Present Sense Impression is a specific exception to the hearsay rule. It allows a statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or immediately thereafter.
Why this Exception Exists
The statement is made contemporaneously with the event or immediately after, minimizing the chance of reflection, fabrication, or faulty memory.
The spontaneity enhances the reliability of the statement.
Elements of Present Sense Impression
Statement Describes or Explains an Event or Condition: The content must relate directly to what is perceived.
Made While or Immediately After Perception: The statement must be made during or shortly after the event or condition being described, so that the declarant did not have time to fabricate or misremember.
Example
Witness says, “That car is speeding!” shouted while seeing the car drive by.
A person immediately says, “It’s raining hard,” while feeling raindrops.
Legal Significance
The Present Sense Impression exception allows such statements to be admitted as evidence even though they are hearsay because they are considered inherently trustworthy.
Relevant Case Law
1. Ohio v. Roberts (1980)
Facts: A statement was admitted under a hearsay exception.
Issue: Reliability of hearsay exceptions.
Ruling: The U.S. Supreme Court held that some hearsay statements could be admitted if they bear "particularized guarantees of trustworthiness."
Significance: Established the foundation for allowing exceptions like present sense impressions based on reliability.
2. Davis v. Washington (2006)
Facts: Statements made to a 911 operator describing an ongoing emergency.
Issue: Whether statements made during an ongoing event qualify as present sense impressions or excited utterances.
Ruling: The Court allowed statements describing the event while it was happening, recognizing them as reliable.
Significance: Reinforced that statements made contemporaneously with an event are admissible.
3. United States v. Diaz (9th Cir. 2003)
Facts: A defendant argued that statements made immediately after an event were hearsay.
Issue: Whether the statements qualified under the present sense impression exception.
Ruling: The court admitted the statements because they described the event while it was happening or immediately thereafter.
Significance: Clarified the timing requirement of this exception.
Distinction Between Present Sense Impression and Excited Utterance
Present Sense Impression: Made during or immediately after perception; focuses on contemporaneous description.
Excited Utterance: Made under the stress of excitement caused by the event; allows for slightly longer time after the event.
Limitations and Cautions
Statements that involve reflection, analysis, or conclusion beyond mere description are not present sense impressions.
Delay between event and statement may disqualify the exception.
The statement must be about a perceived event or condition, not about a past or unrelated fact.
Summary
Hearsay is generally inadmissible, but Present Sense Impressions are an important exception.
A present sense impression is a statement describing or explaining an event made while it is happening or immediately thereafter.
Courts admit such statements because their spontaneity ensures reliability.
Key cases like Ohio v. Roberts, Davis v. Washington, and United States v. Diaz uphold this principle.
The distinction between present sense impression and excited utterance is important for timing and context.
RELATED Blog
0 comments