Rule 804 addresses unavailable declarants. What does it govern?

Test your knowledge of the OCLRE Rules of Evidence. Engage with multiple choice questions and flashcards, each equipped with hints and detailed explanations. Prepare confidently for your examination today!

Multiple Choice

Rule 804 addresses unavailable declarants. What does it govern?

Explanation:
Rule 804 covers what happens when a witness (the declarant) is unavailable to testify and which exceptions allow their out-of-court statements to be admitted despite the hearsay rule. The concept hinges on recognizing when a person can’t be called to testify—unavailability can arise from privilege, refusal to testify despite a court order, failure to appear, inability to testify due to death or illness, or memory loss about the subject after being sworn. When the declarant is unavailable, the rule provides specific exceptions that let their prior statements come in for the truth of the matter asserted. Typical examples include former testimony given at another hearing, dying declarations (statements made under the belief that death is imminent about the cause or circumstances of death), and statements against the declarant’s own interest (which were unlikely to be made if false and are supported by corroborating circumstances). There are additional recognized exceptions as well. This topic is about the framework for admitting statements of unavailable declarants, not about impeachment, expert qualifications, or document authentication, which are governed by other rules.

Rule 804 covers what happens when a witness (the declarant) is unavailable to testify and which exceptions allow their out-of-court statements to be admitted despite the hearsay rule. The concept hinges on recognizing when a person can’t be called to testify—unavailability can arise from privilege, refusal to testify despite a court order, failure to appear, inability to testify due to death or illness, or memory loss about the subject after being sworn.

When the declarant is unavailable, the rule provides specific exceptions that let their prior statements come in for the truth of the matter asserted. Typical examples include former testimony given at another hearing, dying declarations (statements made under the belief that death is imminent about the cause or circumstances of death), and statements against the declarant’s own interest (which were unlikely to be made if false and are supported by corroborating circumstances). There are additional recognized exceptions as well.

This topic is about the framework for admitting statements of unavailable declarants, not about impeachment, expert qualifications, or document authentication, which are governed by other rules.

Subscribe

Get the latest from Passetra

You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our privacy policy