Opinion ID: 1983619
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: smith's statement to the police

Text: According to a police report written by Officer Turner, when Smith was arrested, he claimed that Anderson had pulled a knife on him. Appellant's Appendix, A-21. Smith tried to introduce that statement at trial, but the trial judge ruled that it was inadmissible hearsay, not within any exception. On appeal, Smith contends that the statement should have been allowed into evidence as an admission by a party-opponent. This argument fails because an admission is a statement offered against the party. D.R.E. 801(d)(2). Here, Smith's self-serving statement was offered in Smith's defense, to show that he was not the aggressor. Alternatively, Smith suggests that his statement to the police should have been treated the same as Anderson's statements to the police, which were admitted under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. D.R.E. 803(2). An excited utterance is defined as, [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. Ibid. The trial judge ruled that Anderson, who was crying and upset at the time she spoke to the police officers, was still under the stress of excitement caused by hours of argument and physical violence. Smith, by contrast, was fast asleep when the police arrived and had to be awoken in order to be taken into custody. From these facts it is clear that Smith's statement does not qualify as an excited utterance and was properly excluded by the trial judge.