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Your email address will not be published.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
  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Wish I could give higher than a 5 for this review. From the start the dedication to detail, care and skill that was applied to my case was outstanding. Robert Feinberg is exceptional at representing his clients. His depth & breadth of experience ma...

    Read more

    Rose M

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    After researching online, hiring Attorney Colleen Santora was the wisest decision I made. She represented me in my personal injury auto accident case. I sustained lingering post-concussive injuries and pain. Throughout a four year process, Colleen...

    Read more

    Diane DeMarco

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Feinberg & Alban did a stellar job representing me at a time when my accident and a busy life didn't leave me any capacity to deal with the logistics of a lawsuit. From across the country, the firm (Ms. Colleen Santora, in particular) handled every a...

    Read more

    Trevor Zierhut

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    I was in a car accident recently that put me in the hospital and having Perry Feinberg from Feinberg & Alban was the best decision I ever made, with having so many choices for representation in these situations. The level of professionalism was incre...

    Read more

    John Stenis

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    I can't say enough about this law firm, and its commitment to its clients. Robert & Colleen took a personal interest in my case, which took several unexpected and frankly wild twists and turns along a very long road. They stuck with it, with me, even...

    Read more

    Wu tang Is for the children

See all reviews
Awards & Affiliations
Contact us

Quick Contact Form