Opinion ID: 1096134
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Testimony of Kathy Booth

Text: Kathy Booth was called as a witness during Jones' case in chief. During the state's cross-examination, Booth was asked what M.J. said in explanation of being found with Bubba's penis in her mouth. Jones objected and the trial court overruled the objection as excepted from the hearsay rule as an excited utterance under M.R.E. 803(2). M.R.E. 803(2) provides: The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule, even thought the declarant is available as a witness:       (2) Excited Utterances. A statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition. Jones contends that Booth's testimony does not fit within the exception as the statement made by M.J. was not triggered by the offense, which happened three days before, but by being caught by Booth with her playmate's penis in her mouth. Jones also contends that the statement was not really an excited utterance as contemplated by the rule, because a period of time passed between the incident and when M.J. began to talk. A detailed discussion of whether the statement is excepted from the prohibition against hearsay is not necessary, as the statement may be categorized as non-hearsay under Rule 801. That rule states: (d) Statements Which are not Hearsay: A statement is not hearsay if: (1) Prior Statements by Witness. The declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement, and the statement is ... (B) consistent with his testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against him of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive ...       M.R.E. 801(d)(1)(B). Under this rule corroborative testimony subsequent to the impeachment of the victim's testimony has been allowed. See, Hosford v. State, 560 So.2d 163, 167 (Miss. 1990) From examining the record of this case, counsel for Jones implied during its cross-examination of M.J. that the incident and M.J.'s testimony was the result of a bad dream and that the incident never actually occurred. It was also implied that M.J.'s testimony was influenced by her mother. In light of these efforts to impeach M.J.'s testimony, as being the result of a dream or influence from her mother, the testimony of Kathy Booth was corroborative of M.J.'s testimony and rebutted the implication that the incident was a bad dream or never happened. As such the testimony was non-hearsay and admissible. This assignment is without merit.