Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels.com

According to Black’s Law Dictionary, an excited is “[a] statement about a startling event made under the stress and excitement of the event.”

In Massachusetts an excited utterance made outside of court (i.e., hearsay) is admissible at trial if

(A) there is an occurrence or event sufficiently startling to render inoperative the normal reflective thought processes of the observer, and

(B) the declarant’s statement was a spontaneous reaction to the occurrence or event and not the result of reflective thought. 

See the Massachusetts Guide to Evidence § 803(2).

A qualifying statement must be made “under the stress of an exciting event and before the declarant has had time to contrive or fabricate the remark.” Commonwealth v. Baldwin, 476 Mass. 1041, 1042 (2017).

The Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) in Baldwin lists key factors a judge may consider when determining whether an out-of-court statement is in fact an “excited utterance”: These factors include:

  • whether the statement is made in the same location as the traumatic event;
  • the circumstances of the statement, including its temporal proximity to the event;
  • the young age of the declarant, and
  • the degree of spontaneity demonstrated by the declarant.

The SJC concludes:

In short, the question is not simply whether the declarant shows any particular form of “excitement,” but rather whether the declarant was acting spontaneously under the influence of the incident at the time the statements were made, and not reflectively.

If a party anticipates introducing an “excited utterance” at trial, the question of its admissibility is often determined in advance through a motion in limine.