Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Note 6 page 164 declarant incompetent to testify

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: tatement be made while in a state of excitement caused by the startling event. Notes: Three holdings in this case: Statements relating to the startling event or condition broader scope of subject matter coverage than explaining an event or condition as in present sense impression. Time element is only important with respect to the duration of the declarant's state of mind Only time req. for excited utterance is that the statement be made while in a state of excitement caused by the startling event. Does not need to be independent evidence of the incident sought to be proved by the exited utterance. Simply must be independent evidence of the startling event itself! (In this case, that the accident actually occurred. Doesn't need to be independent evidence that the woman reported the stop sign being down) Note 1, 161: "Relating to a startling event" Napier, Hunt (Texas), and Beverly Cases where really there are two startling events...but that's not what triggers the statement, statement is triggered by a much later recollection of the event, and that in itself is sufficiently startling to satisfy the condition. Note 3, Page 162: Lapse of time Most frequently litigated issue under exited utterance. Doctrine is simply that if there is sufficient emotional distr...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online