Opinion ID: 1908937
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Can a Question be a Statement?

Text: Having rejected the declarant-intent basis for determining whether an utterance is an assertion, and hence a statement capable of being hearsay, we turn next to the narrower issue of whether an utterance may qualify as an assertion and a statement if it occurs in the form of a question. The grammatical form of an utterance does not control whether the words are hearsay. As the Committee note to Maryland Rule 5-801 explains, [t]he fact that proffered evidence is in the form of a question or something other than a narrative statement ... does not necessarily preclude its being an assertion. Our definition of hearsay leads to the conclusion that the particular form of an utterance is not determinative of whether an utterance is an assertion and hence potential hearsay. An out-of-court question may be probative because, by asking it, the declarant potentially communicated a given factual proposition. Offering the question to prove the truth of that proposition presents the dangers we have explained supra. Through faulty perception or memory, the declarant may have been mistaken in believing the proposition at issue. Through the declarant's ambiguous use of language, the fact finder may misunderstand what the declarant was asking, and thus draw incorrect inferences to supposed implications. The declarant may have been insincere in asking the question i.e. may have been pretending ignorance as to the subject matter or feigning interest in the information soughtthus giving rise to misleading inferences about his or her underlying beliefs. In Brown v. Commonwealth, 25 Va.App. 171, 487 S.E.2d 248, 252 (1997), the defendant was charged with burglary and sex crimes after he allegedly broke into a woman's apartment and sexually assaulted her. Brown claimed that the complainant had consented to the sexual acts and to his entry into her apartment, and contended that they had known each other for some time. In support of this theory, Brown sought to introduce a police officer's testimony that Brown had asked does Peggy know I'm here during his detention at a police station. The trial court held that these words were hearsay. The Virginia Court of Appeals affirmed, explaining as follows: The defendant offered the statement, `Does Peggy know I am here?', to prove by implication from the question that he personally knew the victim. In order for the jury to infer from the statement that the defendant knew the victim, the jury had to determine the truth or falsity of the implied assertion. The statement's probative value depended entirely upon the truth of an inferred fact that the statement implied and as such it was hearsay. Defendant's statement to Officer Berryman was not relevant for any other purpose and the fact that the statement was made in no way proved the defendant's relationship with the victim unless the truthfulness of the implied assertion was accepted. Therefore, the statement was offered to prove the truth of its content and it was inadmissible hearsay. Id. at 252.