Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 15-25-35 (2026)
Notice to Adverse Party.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
The proponent of the statement must inform the adverse party of the opponent’s intention to offer the statement and the content of the statement sufficiently in advance of the proceeding to provide the defendant with a fair opportunity to prepare a response to the statement before the proceeding at which it is offered.
(Acts 1989, No. 89-876, p. 1754, §5.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case: State Dept. of Human Resources v. Gibert, 681 So. 2d 560 (Ala. Civ. App. 1995).
State Dept. of Human Resources v. Gibert, 681 So. 2d 560 (Ala. Civ. App. 1995). “Such protection, requiring notice to the accused of the intent to use the hearsay testimony, is provided in § 15-25-35, Ala. Code 1975, which was adopted by the department as part of its procedure for conducting administrative hearings on child abuse allegations.”
Shouldis v. State, 38 So. 3d 753 (Ala. Crim. App. 2008). “] Pursuant to Alabama Code Section § 15-25-35,” upon a conversation his counsel had had with the district attorney, and upon “discovery matters that were received and information at the preliminary hearing” to apprise him of the specific charges against which he was to defend.”
C.M. v. State, 889 So. 2d 57 (Ala. Crim. App. 2004). “According to the appellant, “[i]t is patently unfair to the accused, and a violation of § 15-25-35 for the State to fail to include the questions that elicited responses included in the statement that was ultimately introduced in the State’s case.”
Ex parte B.B.S. v. State, 647 So. 2d 709 (Ala. 1994). “See § 15-25-35. The court agreed with the district attorney’s arguments: “This out-of-court statement is not admissible under [§] 15-25-31 due to the fact that no notice was given pursuant to the Act, for one thing.”
Campos v. State, 217 So. 3d 1 (Ala. Crim. App. 2015). “In his brief, Campos acknowledges that § 15-25-31 may have applied; however, he argues that the State did not assert that statute, nor did it comply with the notice requirement in § 15-25-35, Ala.Code 1975. Campos failed to preserve this specific argument for appellate review.”
Latimer v. State, 659 So. 2d 129 (Ala. Crim. App. 1994). “Specifically, the appellant argues that testimony from two witnesses concerning the victim’s complaint was improperly admitted, because, he says, the prosecutor did not comply with § 15-25-35, Code of Alabama 1975, which requires the State to give the appellant notice of its…”
C.L.Y. v. State, 928 So. 2d 1047 (Ala. Crim. App. 2003). “” § 15-25-35, Ala. Code 1975. “Before a statement may be admitted pursuant to this article on the grounds that the child declarant is unavailable as a witness, such statement may be admitted only if there is corroborative evidence of the act.”
CM v. State, 889 So. 2d 57 (Ala. Crim. App. 2004). “According to the appellant, "[i]t is patently unfair to the accused, and a violation of § 15-25-35 for the State to fail to include the questions that elicited responses included in the statement that was ultimately introduced in the State's case.”
Ex Parte BBS, 647 So. 2d 709 (Ala. 1994). “See § 15-25-35. The court agreed with the district attorney's arguments: "This out-of-court statement is not admissible under [§] 15-25-31 due to the fact that no notice was given pursuant to the Act, for one thing.”
State of Alabama v. Abraham Hatch (Ala. Crim. App. 2026). “" § 15-25-35, Ala. Code 1975. In this case, the record indicates that the State notified Hatch of its intent to offer T.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.