Evidence · Excited Utterance
Clear answer to: What Are The Defenses To Excited Utterance in Evidence? with key cases, examples, and exam tips for law students.
Defenses to excited utterance evidence typically hinge on the assertion that the statement did not qualify as an excited utterance due to the absence of a sufficiently shocking event or a lack of spontaneity due to time or circumstances.
The excited utterance exception to hearsay rules allows statements made under the stress of excitement caused by a startling event to be admitted as evidence. However, for a statement to qualify as an excited utterance, it must be made contemporaneously with the startling event or immediately thereafter and must reflect the declarant's emotional state influenced by the event. Therefore, a strong defense against the admissibility of such statements can argue that the criteria for this exception have not been met.
One critical defense is the timing of the statement. Courts generally look for a statement made shortly after the event, but if a significant amount of time has passed, the likelihood that the statement is a true reflection of the excitement diminishes. For instance, if a witness reports what they saw during an incident but waited several hours to provide that testimony, opposing counsel might argue that the excitement has dissipated, thus invalidating the excited utterance exception.
Another potential defense relates to the nature of the startling event itself. If it can be demonstrated that the event did not significantly shock or disturb the declarant, the emotional state necessary for an excited utterance may be absent. For example, a situation where a person calmly recounts an accident several minutes later - without emotional distress - can challenge the admission of statements as excited utterances.
Additionally, evidence of fabrication or suggestive influences (such as leading questions from investigators) can also be used as a defense. If it is possible to show that the witness was influenced or that their statement was fabricated due to pressure or a suggestive environment, this undermines the reliability of the excited utterance as a spontaneous reaction to the event.
Overall, defenses against excited utterance evidence must focus on the emotional state and the context of the statement to effectively challenge its admissibility under the excited utterance exception.
In a hypothetical car accident case, a witness might claim they saw the accident and immediately exclaimed, 'That car ran a red light!' If the opposing counsel can demonstrate that the witness waited ten minutes before making this statement and had calmed down significantly, they could argue against its admissibility as an excited utterance.
Questions regarding excited utterances and defenses to their admissibility often appear in the context of hearsay exceptions. Students should be familiar with the criteria for excited utterance and the common challenges to its admissibility.