Search Site
Menu
Distinctions with a difference: present sense impressions vs. excited utterances

Though they seem similar, there are clear and definitive differences between Rule 803(1) Present Sense Impressions and Rule 803(2) Excited Utterances. If applied correctly, each rule provides an exception to the the rule against hearsay. The former is used in court in the trial of a personal injury case far more than the latter. The present sense impression exception involves a “statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it”. The rule has two conditions which must be met: first, that the statement explains or describes the event, and second that it is made during or immediately after the event. The excited utterance exception involves “a statement relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement that it caused.” Likewise, this rule also has two conditions which must be met: first, that the declarant speaks while excited– under the “ambit of excitement”– by the event and second, that the excited speech “relates” to the event.

The major difference between the two exceptions is the factors which limit their applicability. The present sense impression exception is very much related to time, requiring either that the statement was made during the event or immediately afterwards . Otherwise, the relationship between the description and the event loses credibility. It is for this reason that the rule prohibits any statement of memory or belief. The excited utterance exception requires that the person is still in an excited state when the statement is made.

Don’t forget that neither of these exceptions– as so often happens in law– cannot come into play until the requisite foundation has been laid.

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Feinberg & Alban, P.C. fervently protects your rights
  • The Boston firm of Feinberg & Alban, P.C. specializes its practice in the area of personal injury.

    The attorneys serve the entire state of Massachusetts in addition to affiliating with lawyers in other states to handle cases outside of Massachusetts.

  • $7.7 Million Award for Feinberg & Alban Client in Personal Injury Trial

    Boston Attorneys Win Highest Injury Verdict in Massachusetts in 2011 & 2012.

Client Reviews
  • lawyers
    5.0/5.0

    Working with this firm was a great experience, they were very attentive to my case and needs ; the results of my case was better that I expected. Thanks to much to all the lawyers involved Sincerely S. Ponce

    Read more

    Client

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    I loved collaborating with my attorney. From day one it felt like teamwork: us against the world, david vs. goliath. There was an easy rapport, free flow of communication, yet she remained the consummate professional at all times. As a first-time pla...

    Read more

    Oyie Ndzie

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Excellent Firm! I cannot give enough praise to Colleen Santora who handled our case . Responsive, professional a true attorney who cares. The entire firm put it all together however Colleen brought it all to the table . Five stars does not seem to sa...

    Read more

    ed thomas

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Atty Santora & staff were very responsive and handled my personal injury case with concern and professional care. I will recommend this firm for legal services.

    Read more

    Regina Benton

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    I had a wonderful experience working with Robert Feinberg and Colleen Santoro. I never once had doubts about how my case would be handled. I knew I was in great hands with both of them. I was always informed and felt confident in their ability to re...

    Read more

    Betsy Rose

See all reviews
Awards & Affiliations
Contact us

Quick Contact Form