Intro to the Federal Rules of Evidence - 70

4. Statement against interest (FRE 804(b)(3))
a. Justification
It is based on a common sense notion that reasonable person tend not to make statements against his own interest unless they believe them to be true.

b. Requirements
i) Meaning of “against interest”
1) When made
The declaration must have been against the declarant’s interest at the time it was made.

2) Pecuniary interest or property interest
Property rights, debts, and tort liability are included.

3) Penal interest
a) Third party’s self- inculpating statement
Independent corroborating evidence is required for the trustworthiness of the statement.

Here are some of factors to be considered to decide what constitutes adequate corroboration: whether the declarant had an apparent motive to lie; the general character of the declarant; whether more than one person heard the statement; whether the declaration was made spontaneously; the timing of the declaration and the relationship between the declarant and the witness; whether there is other evidence linking the declarant to the crime.

b) Statement inculpating the accused
The prosecution may introduce an out-of-court declaration, made against the declarant’s penal interest, that has the effect of inculpating the accused.

c) Co-defendant’s confession may not be admissible
The confession of a co-defendant implicating himself and the accused may not be admissible because of confrontation problems.

c. Inadmissibility of collateral statements
Statements may consist of declaration- against- interest parts and collateral parts (neutral or self-serving).

Under the principle of single mark, self-inculpatory parts and collateral parts are separated. And self-inculpatory statements are admissible, while collateral statements are not admissible under 804(b)(3).

It is because the fact that a statement is self-inculpatory does make it more reliable; but the fact that a statement is collateral to a self-inculpatory statement says nothing at all about the collateral statement’s reliability. See Williamson v. United States, 512 U.S. 594 (1994).

Intro to the Federal Rules of Evidence - 69

3. Statement under belief of impending death (FRE 804(b)(2))
a. Justification
The basis of its trustworthiness is more religious and psychological than it is legal: people would not want to die with a lie upon their lips.

b. Requirements
i) Awareness of imminent death
It is not enough that he knows that he is seriously ill/wounded, or that he will probably die.

1) Actual death not required
It will suffice if the declarant is unavailable for some reason other than death (e.g., disability or forgetfulness).

ii) Homicide cases or civil actions
Dying declarations can be used in civil cases. But regarding criminal cases, they can be used only in homicide cases.

iii) Must relate to circumstances of killing
The statement must be one concerning the cause or circumstances of what the declarant believed to be his impending death.

c. Miscellaneous
i) Usable on accused’s behalf
Dying declarations may be admitted on behalf of the defendant, even though most of the time they are admitted against him.

ii) Personal knowledge
As with other out-of-court declarations, the dying declaration will be admissible only if it appears to come from the declarant’s first-hand knowledge.