State v. Young
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
¶1 In a pretrial hearing, the trial court determined that hearsay statements were admissible as excited utterances even though the declarant later recanted the statements, the circumstances surrounding the statements provided the only corroboration that a startling event occurred, and minor discrepancies existed in the witnesses’ testimony about the content of the statements. We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the hearsay statements as excited utterances and affirm the Court of Appeals.
Fairhurst, J.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶2 The petitioner, Henry…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Pennsylvania v. RitchieSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- State v. SwanWashington Supreme Court · 1990
- State v. WoodsWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. WaltonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1992
- State v. StraussWashington Supreme Court · 1992
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- State v. ThorgersonWashington Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. MagersWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. MagersWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. RodriquezCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- State v. NavaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.