Conn. R. Evid. 8-2

As amended through July 1, 2024

Section 8-2 - Hearsay Rule

(a)General Rule. Hearsay is inadmissible, except as provided in the Code, the General Statutes or any Practice Book rule adopted before June 18, 2014, the date on which the Supreme Court adopted the Code.

(b)Testimonial Statements and Constitutional Right of Confrontation. In criminal cases, hearsay statements which might otherwise be admissible under one of the exceptions in this Article may be inadmissible if the admission of such statements is in violation of the constitutional right of confrontation.

Conn. Code. Evid. 8-2

Amended Dec. 14, 2017, to take effect 2/1/2018.

COMMENTARY

(a) General Rule.

Section 8-2 is consistent with common law. See State v. Oquendo, 223 Conn. 635, 664, 613 A.2d 1300 (1992); State v. Acquin, 187 Conn. 647, 680, 448 A.2d 163 (1982), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1229, 103 S. Ct. 3570, 77 L. Ed. 2d 1411 (1983), overruled in part on other grounds by Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452, 114 S. Ct. 2350, 129 L. Ed. 2d 362 (1994); General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Capitol Garage Inc., 154 Conn. 593, 597, 227 A.2d 548 (1967).

In a few instances, the Practice Book contains rules of evidence that may ostensibly conflict with Code provisions. The Supreme Court has resolved any such conflicts either through decisional law or by formally adopting certain hearsay exceptions embodied in the rules of practice, adopted before June 18, 2014, the date on which the Court adopted the Code. See, e.g., Practice Book §§ 13-31(a) (2) (depositions of certain health care providers admissible, availability immaterial); 13-31(a) (3) (deposition of party or officer, director, managing agent or employee on behalf of corporation, partnership or government agency, admissible when used by adverse party for any purpose); 13-31(a) (4) (deposition admissible, inter alia, if witness is thirty miles or more from place of trial); 25-60(c) (reports of evaluation or study in family matters prepared under Practice Book §§ 25-60A and 25-61, admissible if author subject to cross-examination); 35a-9 (reports in dispositional phase of child neglect proceedings admissible, if author subject to cross-examination); see also Hibbard v. Hibbard, 139 Conn. App. 10, 15, 55 A.3d 301 (2012) (report and hearsay statements contained therein admissible under Practice Book § 25-60 ).

(b) Testimonial Statements and Constitutional Right of Confrontation.

This subsection reflects the federal constitutional principle announced in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 68-69, 124 S. Ct. 1354, 158 L. Ed. 2d 177 (2004), which holds that testimonial hearsay is admissible against a criminal defendant at trial only if the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant who is otherwise unavailable to testify at trial. See U.S. Const., amend. VI; Conn. Const., art. I, § 8.