Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 23 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from People v. Johnson.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Johnson Anchor | green | “an out-of-court statement is properly admissible under the excited utterance exception when made under the stress of excitement caused by an external event, and not the product of studied reflection and possible fabrication” | 7 |
| 2 | People v. Johnson | green | “made under the stress of excitement caused by an external event, and not the product of studied reflection and possible fabrication” | 4 |
| 3 | People v. Johnson | green | “an out-of-court statement is properly admissible under the excited utterance hearsay exception when made under the stress of excitement caused by an external event, and not the product of studied reflection and possible fabrication” | 3 |
| 4 | People v. Cantave | green | “the essential element of this hearsay exception is that the declarant spoke while under the stress or influence of the excitement caused by the event, so that his or her reflective capacity was stilled” | 3 |
| 5 | People v. Harris | green | “neither induced, provoked nor encouraged by the actions of the police officers” | 3 |
| 6 | People v. Roberts | green | “the result of express questioning or its functional equivalent” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.