Tome v. United States, 513 U.S. 150 (1995)
Tome v. United States is a foundational U.S.
Under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B), may a prior consistent statement be admitted as nonhearsay to rebut a charge of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive if the statement was made after the alleged motive to fabricate or improper influence arose?
Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) provides that a declarant-witness's prior consistent statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination about the prior statement, and the statement is offered to rebut an express or implied charge of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive (or, after the 2014 amendment, to rehabilitate the declarant's credibility when attacked on another ground). As interpreted in Tome, for statements offered to rebut a charge of fabrication or improper influence or motive, the statement must have been made before the alleged motive or influence arose—the "premotive" requirement.
No. A prior consistent statement is admissible as nonhearsay under Rule 801(d)(1)(B) to rebut a charge of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive only if it was made before the alleged motive to fabricate or improper influence arose.
Tome cements the premotive requirement for prior consistent statements used to rebut charges of fabrication or improper influence or motive. For law students, it illustrates how the Federal Rules often codify, rather than discard, key common-law limitations, and how textual interpretation is informed by historical practice and Advisory Committee Notes. Practically, Tome limits the government's or any party's ability to pile on multiple witnesses to repeat out-of-court statements when those statements were made after bias or motive attached. The 2014 amendment to Rule 801(d)(1)(B) maintains Tome's premotive rule in subsection (i) while adding subsection (ii), which permits prior consistent statements to be admitted substantively to rehabilitate credibility when attacked on other grounds (such as inconsistency or faulty memory). Tome remains the touchstone for determining timing and relevance when the attack is one of fabrication or improper influence or motive.