FRE · Rule 803

FRE Rule 803

Quick Answer

What is FRE Rule 803?

This guide provides an overview of FRE Rule 803, including its provisions and practical application in legal settings.

Source: FRE Rule 803

Official Text
Rule 803 provides that certain types of hearsay statements are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness. These statements include, but are not limited to, spontaneous utterances, present sense impressions, and statements made for medical diagnosis.
Plain Language

FRE Rule 803 allows certain hearsay statements to be admissible in court, even if the person who made the statement is not available to testify. This rule recognizes that some statements are credible enough to be considered reliable evidence due to their nature or context.

Purpose

The purpose of this rule is to ensure that statements deemed reliable and relevant can be used in court, promoting justice while still maintaining the integrity of evidence. It allows for exceptions to the hearsay rule based on the trustworthiness of specific types of statements.

Key Provisions

803(1) - Present Sense Impression

This provision permits the admission of statements describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or immediately thereafter.

803(2) - Excited Utterance

This allows statements made under the stress of excitement caused by a startling event to be admitted as evidence, reflecting the reliability of the spontaneous reaction.

803(4) - Statement Made for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment

This provision allows statements made for the purpose of facilitating medical diagnosis or treatment to be admissible, assuming these statements are relevant to the treatment.

Practice Notes
  • When introducing evidence under FRE Rule 803, be prepared to show the context of the statement to establish its admissibility.
  • Pay close attention to the timing of the statement in relation to the event it describes, particularly for the present sense impression and excited utterance exceptions.
  • Have foundational evidence ready to demonstrate that the declarant’s statements were reliable and fall within the specific hearsay exceptions outlined in the rule.
Landmark Cases

Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 (1980)

This case discussed the reliability of hearsay statements under the public records exception and helped refine the interpretation of admissible hearsay under relevant provisions.

Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006)

The Court clarified the distinction between testimonial and non-testimonial statements, influencing the application of exceptions in Rule 803.

Exam Tip

FRE Rule 803 is often tested in relation to the hearsay rule and its exceptions, so familiarize yourself with specific provisions and application examples for exam scenarios.

Related Rules
  • fre-rule-804
  • fre-rule-805

Master Federal Rules with Briefly

Get AI-powered study tools, practice questions, and comprehensive legal resources.