Florida Statute 90.801 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title VII
EVIDENCE

Chapter 90
EVIDENCE CODE

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 90.801

90.801 Hearsay; definitions; exceptions.—

(1) The following definitions apply under this chapter:

(a) A “declarant” is a person who makes a statement.

(b) “Hearsay” is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

1. An oral or written assertion; or

2. Nonverbal conduct of a person if it is intended by the person as an assertion.

(2) A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement and the statement is:

(a) Inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition;

(b) Consistent with the declarant’s testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication; or

History.—s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; ss. 19, 22, ch. 78-361; ss. 1, 2, ch. 78-379; s. 2, ch. 81-93; s. 497, ch. 95-147; s. 21, ch. 2023-8.

F.S. 90.801 on Google Scholar

F.S. 90.801 on CourtListener

Amendments to 90.801

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 90.801

Total Results: 575

Pagan v. State

830 So. 2d 792, 2002 WL 500315

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 4, 2002 | Docket: 329524

Cited 585 times | Published

609 *810 So.2d 493, 499 (Fla.1992)) (quoting section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1989)). The trial

Jones v. State

709 So. 2d 512, 1998 WL 114500

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 17, 1998 | Docket: 1682150

Cited 297 times | Published

admissible as non-hearsay substantive evidence under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1997). [11] The State

Thompson v. State

759 So. 2d 650, 2000 WL 373757

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 2000 | Docket: 1421331

Cited 201 times | Published

prior inconsistent testimony admissible under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1987).(4) Although

Fitzpatrick v. State

900 So. 2d 495, 2005 WL 168510

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 2005 | Docket: 463018

Cited 154 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2001). Romines' statements

Breedlove v. State

413 So. 2d 1

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 1982 | Docket: 1344656

Cited 146 times | Published

modified the definition of hearsay as set out in § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1981). [8] In denying the

State v. Smith

573 So. 2d 306, 1990 WL 252114

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 1990 | Docket: 132818

Cited 126 times | Published

an "other proceeding" within the meaning of section 90.801(2)(a) of the Florida Statutes (1985). Smith

Morrison v. State

818 So. 2d 432, 2002 WL 432561

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 21, 2002 | Docket: 1169841

Cited 103 times | Published

offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801(1)(c) Fla. Stat. (1997) ("`Hearsay' is a statement

Kelley v. State

486 So. 2d 578, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 159

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 1986 | Docket: 2450250

Cited 98 times | Published

testimony at trial to be properly admissible under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1983). While keeping

Chandler v. State

702 So. 2d 186, 1997 WL 633729

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 16, 1997 | Docket: 2313637

Cited 96 times | Published

fabrication." Rodriguez, 609 So.2d at 500 (quoting section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1989)). In this case

John S. Freund v. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General

165 F.3d 839, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 809, 1999 WL 24620

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 22, 1999 | Docket: 2085742

Cited 93 times | Published

Daniell that Freund was killing him. Fla. Stat. § 90.801 (l)(c) (1998). . They called the vice squad

Chamberlain v. State

881 So. 2d 1087, 2004 WL 1348732

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 17, 2004 | Docket: 1465878

Cited 87 times | Published

Thibault through prior consistent statements. Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (2003), which excludes some

Ray v. State

755 So. 2d 604, 2000 WL 123997

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 3, 2000 | Docket: 1334326

Cited 86 times | Published

evidence consisted of inadmissible hearsay. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1995). Whitney testified that the

Nodar v. Galbreath

462 So. 2d 803, 23 Educ. L. Rep. 406

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 13, 1984 | Docket: 1290330

Cited 82 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1981). Petitioner says the ruling

Puryear v. State

810 So. 2d 901, 2002 WL 188359

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 2002 | Docket: 1654664

Cited 77 times | Published

offense of robbery with a weapon.[3] Based upon section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1999), the Fourth

Bradley v. State

787 So. 2d 732, 2001 WL 197024

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 2001 | Docket: 1495764

Cited 77 times | Published

recent fabrication.'" Id. at 197-98; see also § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1995). The trial court allowed

Flanagan v. State

625 So. 2d 827, 1993 WL 347761

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 9, 1993 | Docket: 401281

Cited 77 times | Published

that the testimony was properly admitted under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1987).

Ibar v. State

938 So. 2d 451, 2006 WL 560586

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 2006 | Docket: 421577

Cited 76 times | Published

"statements of identification" as contemplated by section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1995); (2) whether

Correll v. State

523 So. 2d 562, 1988 WL 33735

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 14, 1988 | Docket: 1517291

Cited 76 times | Published

applicable exception, hearsay evidence is inadmissible. § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1985). It is well settled that the

Woods v. State

733 So. 2d 980, 1999 WL 215347

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 1999 | Docket: 1188622

Cited 74 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted." See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995). Section 90.803(3)(a)

Ellis v. State

622 So. 2d 991, 1993 WL 241044

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 1993 | Docket: 1529031

Cited 74 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1989). The State raises alternative

Sonia Jacobs A/K/A Sonia Linder v. Harry K. Singletary, Marta Villacorta and Jim Smith

952 F.2d 1282, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 1439, 1992 WL 7453

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 6, 1992 | Docket: 558611

Cited 74 times | Published

matter asserted. See Fla.Stat. Ann. § 90.801(2) (West 1979). The examiner’s report, if accepted

Taylor v. State

855 So. 2d 1, 2003 WL 21283161

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 2003 | Docket: 1752466

Cited 66 times | Published

State, 609 So.2d 493, 500 (Fla.1992)); see also § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1999). However, a witness's

Morton v. State

689 So. 2d 259, 1997 WL 93765

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 1997 | Docket: 1477519

Cited 66 times | Published

truth of their contents. Though not identical, section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (1993), is substantially

Wright v. State

586 So. 2d 1024, 1991 WL 165227

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 1991 | Docket: 1742357

Cited 66 times | Published

Ashe. Therefore, the evidence was hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1985). Wright also raises two

Wright v. State

586 So. 2d 1024, 1991 WL 165227

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 1991 | Docket: 1742357

Cited 66 times | Published

Ashe. Therefore, the evidence was hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1985). Wright also raises two

Lopez v. State

888 So. 2d 693, 2004 WL 2600408

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 17, 2004 | Docket: 66825

Cited 65 times | Published

provided by statute. Hearsay is defined in section 90.801(1)(c) as "a statement, other than one made

State v. Baird

572 So. 2d 904, 1990 WL 191708

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 29, 1990 | Docket: 301935

Cited 64 times | Published

Florida's Evidence Code was adopted in 1976. Under section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1987), hearsay is

Reynolds v. State

934 So. 2d 1128, 2006 WL 1381880

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 18, 2006 | Docket: 1460819

Cited 59 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2003). Hearsay is inadmissible

Shellito v. State

701 So. 2d 837, 1997 WL 561433

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 11, 1997 | Docket: 1448560

Cited 57 times | Published

testimony. The trial court allowed the testimony. Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1995), allows a prior

Johnson v. State

969 So. 2d 938, 2007 WL 1933048

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 5, 2007 | Docket: 1403693

Cited 55 times | Published

Hagin's statement constituted hearsay under section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2006), because the

Rodriguez v. State

609 So. 2d 493, 1992 WL 275891

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 8, 1992 | Docket: 1738340

Cited 55 times | Published

Fernandez and Valdez were properly admitted under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1989), which excludes

Smith v. State

424 So. 2d 726

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 28, 1982 | Docket: 2489148

Cited 55 times | Published

confession, so they were not even hearsay at all. Id. § 90.801(1)(c). Appellant contends that the court erred

Keen v. State

775 So. 2d 263, 2000 WL 1424523

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 28, 2000 | Docket: 2543941

Cited 54 times | Published

clothe such hearsay under a nonhearsay label. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1999); Wright v. State, 586

Hutchinson v. State

882 So. 2d 943, 2004 WL 1469327

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 2004 | Docket: 2451581

Cited 53 times | Published

the truth of the matter asserted therein. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2003); Hitchcock v. State,

Deparvine v. State

995 So. 2d 351, 2008 WL 4380919

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 29, 2008 | Docket: 1684767

Cited 50 times | Published

id. [14] These components are embodied in section 90.801(1)-(3), Florida Statutes (2007). Alexander

State v. Moore

485 So. 2d 1279, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 157

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 1986 | Docket: 1276087

Cited 50 times | Published

denied the motion to dismiss and later held that section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), permitted the

Pearce v. State

880 So. 2d 561, 2004 WL 1469337

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 2004 | Docket: 1689202

Cited 48 times | Published

hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition." § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2001) (emphasis added). However

Moore v. State

701 So. 2d 545, 1997 WL 603489

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 2, 1997 | Docket: 1736799

Cited 44 times | Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication." § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1995).[1] It was not error

Thompson v. State

619 So. 2d 261, 1993 WL 92767

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 1, 1993 | Docket: 2040890

Cited 44 times | Published

inconsistent testimony met the requirements of section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), and was admissible

Jackson v. State

599 So. 2d 103, 1992 WL 68952

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 9, 1992 | Docket: 1741485

Cited 44 times | Published

trial testimony, it was properly admitted under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1989).[2]Alvin v.

Mordenti v. State

894 So. 2d 161, 2004 WL 2922134

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 2004 | Docket: 1767706

Cited 41 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2001) (defining hearsay as

Brooks v. State

787 So. 2d 765, 2001 WL 326683

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 5, 2001 | Docket: 1495756

Cited 41 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1997). Section 90.803 provides

Norton v. State

709 So. 2d 87, 1997 WL 792794

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 24, 1997 | Docket: 1682011

Cited 40 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1993). Although we find no

Foster v. State

778 So. 2d 906, 2000 WL 1259395

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 7, 2000 | Docket: 1687078

Cited 39 times | Published

testimony of several witnesses. As defined in section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1997), "`[h]earsay'

Dufour v. State

495 So. 2d 154, 55 U.S.L.W. 2247

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 4, 1986 | Docket: 1758894

Cited 39 times | Published

of a statement made by Taylor in 1982, under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1983), as prior consistent

Stoll v. State

762 So. 2d 870, 2000 WL 350558

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 2000 | Docket: 472165

Cited 37 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1997); see Woods, 733 So.2d

Power v. State

605 So. 2d 856, 1992 WL 205517

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 27, 1992 | Docket: 1702001

Cited 37 times | Published

identification of a person made after perceiving him. See § 90.801(2)(c). Frank Miller testified at trial and was

Penalver v. State

926 So. 2d 1118, 2006 WL 240418

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 2006 | Docket: 467119

Cited 36 times | Published

testimony was not hearsay. Hearsay is defined in section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2005), as "a statement

Anderson v. State

574 So. 2d 87, 1991 WL 1328

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 3, 1991 | Docket: 2449739

Cited 36 times | Published

were not hearsay, and were admissible under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1985). That section

Parker v. State

476 So. 2d 134, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 415

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 22, 1985 | Docket: 413012

Cited 35 times | Published

Code contains certain exceptions to this rule. Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1981), provides such

State v. Contreras

979 So. 2d 896, 2008 WL 657867

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 2008 | Docket: 1714383

Cited 34 times | Published

provided by statute. Hearsay is defined in section 90.801(1)(c) as "a statement, other than one made

State v. Green

667 So. 2d 756, 1995 WL 752298

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 1995 | Docket: 341564

Cited 33 times | Published

INCONSISTENT STATEMENT, ADMISSIBLE PURSUANT TO SECTION 90.801(2)(a), FLORIDA STATUTES, CONSTITUTE SUFFICIENT

Peterka v. State

640 So. 2d 59, 1994 WL 137858

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 1994 | Docket: 2452118

Cited 33 times | Published

irrelevant, and highly prejudicial. Under section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1989), hearsay is

State v. Freber

366 So. 2d 426

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 1978 | Docket: 1227095

Cited 33 times | Published

cross-examination concerning the identification. § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1977). Several other jurisdictions

Evans v. State

838 So. 2d 1090, 2002 WL 31519866

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 14, 2002 | Docket: 18343

Cited 32 times | Published

their admission was not error because under section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1999), a statement is not

Stewart v. State

558 So. 2d 416, 1990 WL 29521

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 15, 1990 | Docket: 1406417

Cited 31 times | Published

1101, 107 S.Ct. 1332, 94 L.Ed.2d 183 (1987); § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1983). Before the penalty phase

Koon v. State

513 So. 2d 1253, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 428

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 1987 | Docket: 1295194

Cited 31 times | Published

truth of the matter asserted in the statement. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1985). An out-of-court statement

Antoine v. State

138 So. 3d 1064, 2014 WL 1796099, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 6716

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 2014 | Docket: 60240462

Cited 28 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. ■ Stat. (2009). “If an out-of-court

Blanton v. State

978 So. 2d 149, 2008 WL 657832

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 2008 | Docket: 2515926

Cited 28 times | Published

802, Fla. Stat. (2006). Hearsay is defined in section 90.801(1)(c) as "a statement, other than one made

McCray v. State

919 So. 2d 647, 2006 WL 176685

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 26, 2006 | Docket: 1678639

Cited 28 times | Published

content of the statement, it was not hearsay. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2004); Morrison v. State, 818

Flanagan v. State

586 So. 2d 1085, 1991 WL 133574

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 14, 1991 | Docket: 473454

Cited 28 times | Published

statement to Dr. Penrod was hearsay at all.[5] Section 90.801(2)(b) provides that a statement is not hearsay

Harris v. State

843 So. 2d 856, 2003 WL 1561437

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 2003 | Docket: 472249

Cited 27 times | Published

recent fabrication.'" Id. at 197-98; see also § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1995). Bradley v. State, 787

Hayes v. State

581 So. 2d 121, 1991 WL 83561

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 23, 1991 | Docket: 1683858

Cited 27 times | Published

The trial court overruled Hayes's objection. Section 90.801(2)(c) of the Florida Statutes (1987) addresses

Card v. State

453 So. 2d 17

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 7, 1984 | Docket: 1162922

Cited 27 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1981). The appellant contends

Smith v. State

7 So. 3d 473, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 405, 2009 WL 702262

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 19, 2009 | Docket: 1227181

Cited 25 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2005). If an out-of-court statement

Sikes v. Seaboard Coast Line R. Co.

429 So. 2d 1216

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 1983 | Docket: 1667487

Cited 25 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (e.s.). The handbook is nothing

Peterson v. State

94 So. 3d 514, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 370, 2012 WL 1722581, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 963

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 17, 2012 | Docket: 60310908

Cited 24 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009). Here, Rundall’s statement

Peterson v. State

94 So. 3d 514, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 370, 2012 WL 1722581, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 963

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 17, 2012 | Docket: 60310908

Cited 24 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009). Here, Rundall’s statement

Evans v. State

808 So. 2d 92, 2001 WL 1585324

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 13, 2001 | Docket: 1474375

Cited 24 times | Published

about specific leads on cross-examination. Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2001), defines "hearsay"

Dhrs v. Mb

701 So. 2d 1155

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 29, 1997 | Docket: 1470459

Cited 24 times | Published

out-of-court statements and in-court testimony in section 90.801, Florida *1161 Statutes (1995), in defining

Austin v. State

461 So. 2d 1380

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 1984 | Docket: 464587

Cited 23 times | Published

the content of such prior statement. Under Section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1983), a prior inconsistent

Jennings v. State

512 So. 2d 169, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 434

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 27, 1987 | Docket: 1517294

Cited 22 times | Published

hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition." § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (1985). In any event, appellant

Begley v. State

483 So. 2d 70, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 321

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 5, 1986 | Docket: 1511980

Cited 21 times | Published

the mother's testimony is admissible under section 90.801(2)(b) of the Florida Statutes, which provides:

State v. Delgado-Santos

497 So. 2d 1199, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 565

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 30, 1986 | Docket: 2514468

Cited 20 times | Published

Const. The issue requires interpretation of section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), to determine

Erp v. Carroll

438 So. 2d 31

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 18, 1983 | Docket: 1731785

Cited 20 times | Published

within the statutory definition of hearsay. See § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (1981). [10] See, e.g., Gibbs

Hulsh v. Hulsh

431 So. 2d 658

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 3, 1983 | Docket: 1512017

Cited 20 times | Published

and is therefore, by definition, hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1981). However, because the

McRae v. State

383 So. 2d 289

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 1980 | Docket: 1512439

Cited 20 times | Published

Piacenti's testimony would not constitute hearsay. Section 90.801(2)(c) provides that a statement is not hearsay

Dias v. State

812 So. 2d 487, 2002 WL 384970

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 2002 | Docket: 1364310

Cited 19 times | Published

was given under oath at the bond hearing. See § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (1999). Therefore, it could

Moore v. State

452 So. 2d 559

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 1984 | Docket: 474481

Cited 19 times | Published

provisions. The Law Revision Council's note to section 90.801(2)(a) explained as follows: Paragraph (a)

McElveen v. State

415 So. 2d 746

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 18, 1982 | Docket: 1512917

Cited 19 times | Published

exception pertinent to this issue is provided in Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes, stating: (2) A statement

State v. Lopez

974 So. 2d 340, 2008 WL 89979

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 10, 2008 | Docket: 1367572

Cited 18 times | Published

not admissible as substantive evidence under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), which provided

Tillman v. State

964 So. 2d 785, 2007 WL 2609428

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 12, 2007 | Docket: 1689853

Cited 18 times | Published

clothe such hearsay under a nonhearsay label. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1999); Wright v. State, 586

Rigdon v. State

621 So. 2d 475, 1993 WL 174881

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 26, 1993 | Docket: 1265405

Cited 18 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1991); see also Selver v. State

Lazarowicz v. State

561 So. 2d 392, 1990 WL 58256

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 8, 1990 | Docket: 1480880

Cited 18 times | Published

she reported her father to the authorities. Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1985), sets forth

Moreno v. State

418 So. 2d 1223

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 7, 1982 | Docket: 1289286

Cited 18 times | Published

relationships, § 90.502-506, Fla. Stat.; hearsay, § 90.801, Fla. Stat.; where probative value is substantially

Fonseca v. Taverna Imports, Inc.

212 So. 3d 431, 2017 WL 36264, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 28

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 4, 2017 | Docket: 4561885

Cited 17 times | Published

influence, motive, or recent fabrication. See § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2014) (providing that a statement

Jackson v. State

25 So. 3d 518, 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 541, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 1577, 2009 WL 3029662

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 24, 2009 | Docket: 1662100

Cited 17 times | Published

State,926 So.2d 1118, 1131 (Fla. 2006) (quoting § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2005)) (emphasis omitted).

Perez v. State

980 So. 2d 1126, 2008 WL 723786

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 19, 2008 | Docket: 1735771

Cited 17 times | Published

statements was in violation of the hearsay rule, see § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2007), and his right to confront

Roberts v. State

678 So. 2d 1232, 1996 WL 296517

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 6, 1996 | Docket: 1737048

Cited 17 times | Published

(Transcript of Proceedings at 24). [2] Under section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (1983), this prior inconsistent

State v. Jones

625 So. 2d 821, 1993 WL 322935

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 26, 1993 | Docket: 474095

Cited 17 times | Published

recent fabrication and improper influence. Section 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1985).[13] On cross-examination

Bacchus v. Bacchus

108 So. 3d 712, 2013 WL 756350, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 3302

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 2013 | Docket: 60229209

Cited 16 times | Published

told him was inadmissible hearsay); see generally § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009) (defining hearsay as

Banks v. State

790 So. 2d 1094, 2001 WL 788085

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 2001 | Docket: 1734529

Cited 16 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1997). Hearsay is generally

Jenkins v. State

547 So. 2d 1017, 1989 WL 97684

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 1989 | Docket: 1738701

Cited 16 times | Published

to bolster her credibility, in violation of section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes. The state responds

Delgado-Santos v. State

471 So. 2d 74, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1426

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 1985 | Docket: 1397478

Cited 16 times | Published

police interrogation is a "proceeding" under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), so as to permit

Bailey v. State

419 So. 2d 721

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 1982 | Docket: 1586164

Cited 16 times | Published

asserted. The statements were hearsay by definition, § 90.801, Fla. Stat., but the trial court felt them to

State v. Fetherolf

388 So. 2d 38

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 17, 1980 | Docket: 420157

Cited 16 times | Published

prior to July 1, 1979, the "new" Evidence Code § 90.801(2)(a) would not be applicable to the trial of

Lambrix v. State

39 So. 3d 260, 35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 211, 2010 Fla. LEXIS 545, 2010 WL 1488028

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 2010 | Docket: 25499

Cited 15 times | Published

claims that are procedurally barred. [11] See § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2009) (providing that a statement

Turtle v. State

600 So. 2d 1214, 1992 WL 123322

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 1992 | Docket: 539573

Cited 15 times | Published

statements to the officer were admissible under section 90.801(2)(b) to rebut a charge of recent fabrication

Lyles v. State

412 So. 2d 458

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 14, 1982 | Docket: 528734

Cited 15 times | Published

testimony. The statements were clearly hearsay. Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1979), provides: "Hearsay"

United States Fidelity & Guar. Co. v. Perez

384 So. 2d 904, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 16902

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 3, 1980 | Docket: 1678550

Cited 15 times | Published

v. Lee, 147 So.2d 359, 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962); § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1979). 5. No other reversible

Burkey v. State

922 So. 2d 1033, 2006 WL 473880

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 2006 | Docket: 1282645

Cited 14 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2005). "The hearsay rule does

Thomas v. State

711 So. 2d 96, 1998 WL 171564

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 1998 | Docket: 39096

Cited 14 times | Published

This was, of course, hearsay as is defined by section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1995). The officer

Williams v. State

714 So. 2d 462, 1997 WL 799591

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 1997 | Docket: 2514149

Cited 14 times | Published

prior inconsistent statement is admitted under section 90.801(2)(a) or section 90.803(23). Id. at 760. The

Downs v. State

574 So. 2d 1095, 1991 WL 6532

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 18, 1991 | Docket: 1436940

Cited 14 times | Published

offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1987). However, for purposes

Hooper v. Barnett Bank of West Florida

474 So. 2d 1253, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2078, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15736

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 5, 1985 | Docket: 2528625

Cited 14 times | Published

offered to prove the fact, it was hearsay. Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1983), Florida Evidence

Dinter v. Brewer

420 So. 2d 932

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 26, 1982 | Docket: 1306523

Cited 14 times | Published

the truth of the matter asserted," is hearsay. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1979). As such, unless it falls

Stanford v. State

576 So. 2d 737, 1991 WL 4311

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 23, 1991 | Docket: 1669887

Cited 13 times | Published

that Stanford was the assailant. According to section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes, [a] statement is not

Page v. Zordan Ex Rel. Zordan

564 So. 2d 500, 1990 WL 60895

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 11, 1990 | Docket: 1689082

Cited 13 times | Published

to be justified as within the provisions of section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1987). We agree with

Snell v. State

939 So. 2d 1175, 2006 WL 3018232

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 25, 2006 | Docket: 1657499

Cited 12 times | Published

consistent statement by one of the officers. See § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. Finally, with respect to Snell's

Neal v. State

697 So. 2d 903, 1997 WL 400088

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 18, 1997 | Docket: 1777028

Cited 12 times | Published

would have been rejected as inadmissible hearsay. § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1995). Moreover, the facts advanced

Preston v. State

470 So. 2d 836, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1489

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 1985 | Docket: 1261696

Cited 12 times | Published

testimony was clearly hearsay. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1983). While section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes

Mercy Hosp., Inc. v. Johnson

431 So. 2d 687, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19369

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 10, 1983 | Docket: 1512011

Cited 12 times | Published

constituted hearsay, Florida Evidence Code, section 90.801(1)(c), as amended by Chapter 81-93, section

Browne v. State

132 So. 3d 312, 2014 WL 223094, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 585, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 201

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 22, 2014 | Docket: 60238420

Cited 11 times | Published

prior consistent statement rule, pursuant to section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2010). Although the

Robinson v. State

74 So. 3d 570, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 18105, 2011 WL 5554829

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 16, 2011 | Docket: 2355709

Cited 11 times | Published

995 P.2d 1217, 1220 (2000)). Moreover, under Section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes, a statement of identification

Smith v. State

880 So. 2d 730, 2004 WL 1175488

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 28, 2004 | Docket: 1295016

Cited 11 times | Published

"statements of identification" pursuant to section 90.801(2)(c). Then the following exchange occurred

Garcia v. State

644 So. 2d 59, 1994 WL 416719

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 11, 1994 | Docket: 1672231

Cited 11 times | Published

the absence of a record is not hearsay under Section 90.801. The record is not being offered to prove the

Reyes v. State

580 So. 2d 309, 1991 WL 87226

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 28, 1991 | Docket: 407315

Cited 11 times | Published

motive, or recent fabrication" against the witness, § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1989), does not apply here

McDonald v. State

578 So. 2d 371, 1991 WL 54131

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 1991 | Docket: 440937

Cited 11 times | Published

prior consistent statements of the victim. Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1989) provides that

Bunyak v. Clyde J. Yancey & Sons Dairy, Inc.

438 So. 2d 891

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 16, 1983 | Docket: 1247949

Cited 11 times | Published

testimony is inadmissible hearsay pursuant to section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1981). Everett v.

Rafael Andres v. State of Florida

254 So. 3d 283

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 20, 2018 | Docket: 7943259

Cited 10 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2016). Where testimony is not

Cayea v. Citimortgage, Inc.

138 So. 3d 1214, 2014 WL 2197616, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 8093

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 28, 2014 | Docket: 60240539

Cited 10 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801 (l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2012). Hearsay is inadmissible

Tumblin v. State

29 So. 3d 1093, 35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 133, 2010 Fla. LEXIS 258, 2010 WL 652982

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 25, 2010 | Docket: 1643471

Cited 10 times | Published

was admissible under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2008). Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes

Beber v. State

887 So. 2d 1248, 2004 WL 2534277

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 2004 | Docket: 466584

Cited 10 times | Published

introduced as substantive evidence at trial under section 90.801(2)(a).[6] Moore was convicted of second-degree

Jordan Ex Rel. Shealey v. Masters

821 So. 2d 342, 2002 WL 1332002

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 19, 2002 | Docket: 2558502

Cited 10 times | Published

prior consistent statement admissible under section 90.801(2)(b). However, halfway through the statement

KIWANIS CLUB v. De Kalafe

723 So. 2d 838, 1998 WL 712705

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 14, 1998 | Docket: 1320140

Cited 10 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995). The remarks quoted in

Livingston v. State

678 So. 2d 895, 1996 WL 471155

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 21, 1996 | Docket: 1737015

Cited 10 times | Published

to none of the exceptions contained within section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1995). REVERSED AND

Keller v. State

586 So. 2d 1258, 1991 WL 191586

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 26, 1991 | Docket: 1487548

Cited 10 times | Published

the statements were properly admitted under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes *1260 (1987), which

Smith v. State

538 So. 2d 66, 1989 WL 5674

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 27, 1989 | Docket: 1517128

Cited 10 times | Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication. Section 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1987). We find on the record

Quiles v. State

523 So. 2d 1261, 1988 WL 39139

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 27, 1988 | Docket: 1517281

Cited 10 times | Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication." § 90.801(2)(b). To be admissible, however, the statement

Fleming v. State

457 So. 2d 499

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 24, 1984 | Docket: 426159

Cited 10 times | Published

S. 882, 103 S.Ct. 184, 74 L.Ed.2d 149 (1982); § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1981).

Starchk v. Wittenberg

411 So. 2d 1000

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 1982 | Docket: 1696889

Cited 10 times | Published

inadmissible as substantive evidence under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), because Mrs

Tanner v. Robinson

411 So. 2d 240, 33 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 350

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 1982 | Docket: 1696919

Cited 10 times | Published

letter fell within the definition of hearsay, section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1979), it would have

Fortune v. Fortune

61 So. 3d 441, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5942, 36 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 869

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 27, 2011 | Docket: 60300479

Cited 9 times | Published

asserted, is the most basic form of hearsay. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009). It is well settled that

Thompson v. Secretary for Department of Corrections

517 F.3d 1279, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 4013, 2008 WL 482544

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 25, 2008 | Docket: 399079

Cited 9 times | Published

inconsistent testimony was admissible under section 90.801(2)(a) of the Florida Statutes, and affirmed

Carter v. State

951 So. 2d 939, 2007 WL 675354

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 7, 2007 | Docket: 1682581

Cited 9 times | Published

car theft. As such, it is classic hearsay. Section 90.801(1)(c) of the Florida Evidence Code defines

Carter v. State

951 So. 2d 939, 2007 WL 675354

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 7, 2007 | Docket: 1682581

Cited 9 times | Published

car theft. As such, it is classic hearsay. Section 90.801(1)(c) of the Florida Evidence Code defines

Tucker v. State

884 So. 2d 168, 2004 WL 1635615

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 23, 2004 | Docket: 1683025

Cited 9 times | Published

admitted as a prior consistent statement under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2002) (stating prior

State v. Richards

843 So. 2d 962, 2003 WL 1916693

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 23, 2003 | Docket: 1243910

Cited 9 times | Published

of a person made after perceiving the person." § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2001). During Ms. Glenn's original

KV v. State

832 So. 2d 264, 2002 WL 31757784

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 2002 | Docket: 1336051

Cited 9 times | Published

sentence for burglary and remand for a new trial. Section 90.801, Florida Statutes, defines hearsay as "a statement

Vezina v. State

644 So. 2d 602, 1994 WL 603150

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 7, 1994 | Docket: 1672241

Cited 9 times | Published

her daughter's property without authorization. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (defining "hearsay"). The remaining

Loper v. Allstate Ins. Co.

616 So. 2d 1055, 1993 WL 96764

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 5, 1993 | Docket: 1385433

Cited 9 times | Published

Unquestionably, this testimony was hearsay. Section 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1991). Allstate argues, however

METRO. DADE COUNTY v. Yearby

580 So. 2d 186, 1991 WL 45209

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 2, 1991 | Docket: 1364810

Cited 9 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted," § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1989) is inadmissible in

Smith v. State

539 So. 2d 514, 1989 WL 14486

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 24, 1989 | Docket: 865219

Cited 9 times | Published

statements to the state attorney's office. See § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (1987); Diamond v. State, 436

Cox v. State

473 So. 2d 778, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1931

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 7, 1985 | Docket: 451734

Cited 9 times | Published

have been excluded as inadmissible hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1983). Nevertheless, the admission

Bricker v. State

462 So. 2d 556, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 203

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 1985 | Docket: 1510025

Cited 9 times | Published

and Torres and, as such, was hearsay testimony. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1981). In the absence of an

Webb v. State

426 So. 2d 1033

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 19, 1983 | Docket: 1283263

Cited 9 times | Published

evidence pursuant to the Florida Evidence Code, section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1979). This is a new

Hines v. State

425 So. 2d 589

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 1982 | Docket: 1182644

Cited 9 times | Published

appellant was not a participant in the offense. § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1981). The point is not preserved

Brown v. State

413 So. 2d 414

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 14, 1982 | Docket: 412720

Cited 9 times | Published

to recall making the prior identification. Section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (1981) states that the

Wade v. Wade

124 So. 3d 369, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 16848, 2013 WL 5735321

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 23, 2013 | Docket: 60235465

Cited 8 times | Published

exceptions to the admission of hearsay evidence. § 90.801 (l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013) (defining "hearsay”

Yang v. Sebastian Lakes Condominium Ass'n

123 So. 3d 617, 2013 WL 4525318, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 13681

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 28, 2013 | Docket: 60235123

Cited 8 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2012). Hearsay is inadmissible unless

Alcantar v. State

987 So. 2d 822, 2008 WL 3539965

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 15, 2008 | Docket: 1395727

Cited 8 times | Published

testimony was clearly inadmissible hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006); D'Agostino v. State

Sproule v. State

927 So. 2d 46, 2006 WL 782483

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 17, 2006 | Docket: 1765362

Cited 8 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006). [2] The Florida legislature

Hernandez v. State

863 So. 2d 484, 2004 WL 86306

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 21, 2004 | Docket: 1728574

Cited 8 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2001). The evidence code defines

Foburg v. State

744 So. 2d 1175, 1999 WL 992726

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 3, 1999 | Docket: 1721499

Cited 8 times | Published

rebutted this implication of recent fabrication. See § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1995). In Jenkins v. State

Harrell v. State

689 So. 2d 400, 1997 WL 90818

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 1997 | Docket: 1477033

Cited 8 times | Published

and is excludable because of its unreliability. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995). We find the satellite

Harrell v. State

647 So. 2d 1016, 1994 WL 706279

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 1994 | Docket: 437748

Cited 8 times | Published

testimony about identification as hearsay. Section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (1993), provides: (2)

Bertram v. State

637 So. 2d 258, 1994 WL 169467

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 1994 | Docket: 1521503

Cited 8 times | Published

"improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication." § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1991). Bertram's defense was

Alexander v. State

627 So. 2d 35, 1993 WL 462759

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 12, 1993 | Docket: 1752848

Cited 8 times | Published

statements made the night of the incident, citing section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes. The court overruled the

Duncan v. State

616 So. 2d 140, 1993 WL 88631

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 25, 1993 | Docket: 1726626

Cited 8 times | Published

wrecked and from which the rims were salvaged. Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1989); State v. Baird

Taylor v. State

601 So. 2d 1304, 1992 WL 153956

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 8, 1992 | Docket: 1305581

Cited 8 times | Published

truth of the matter contained in the statement. Section 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1991). Here, Taylor did not dispute

Dudley v. State

545 So. 2d 857, 1989 WL 65508

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 15, 1989 | Docket: 1345717

Cited 8 times | Published

3d DCA 1983), argued to the trial judge that section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), allows a prior

Wise v. State

546 So. 2d 1068, 1989 WL 57226

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 31, 1989 | Docket: 1730997

Cited 8 times | Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication. § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1985). However, in order to

Logan v. State

511 So. 2d 442, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2032

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 1987 | Docket: 1723348

Cited 8 times | Published

admissible under any of the hearsay exceptions. § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1985); Fagan v. State, 425 So.2d

Chao v. State

478 So. 2d 30, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 570

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 1985 | Docket: 1484941

Cited 8 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1981). The statement in the

Hunt v. State

429 So. 2d 811

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 1983 | Docket: 1221260

Cited 8 times | Published

as related by the witnesses, were hearsay. Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1981). In the absence of

Bell v. State

179 So. 3d 349, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14993, 2015 WL 5883607

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 9, 2015 | Docket: 60251742

Cited 7 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014) (emphasis added), “A

TJN v. State

977 So. 2d 770, 2008 WL 818808

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2008 | Docket: 550940

Cited 7 times | Published

declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006).[2] The "declarant" of

Thompson v. State

890 So. 2d 382, 2004 WL 2953312

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 22, 2004 | Docket: 476896

Cited 7 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2002). In this case, the State

Miller v. State

870 So. 2d 15, 2003 WL 21766500

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 1, 2003 | Docket: 1698100

Cited 7 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1999). This testimony was not

Monday v. State

792 So. 2d 1278, 2001 WL 1013594

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 6, 2001 | Docket: 1416739

Cited 7 times | Published

exceptions to the general rule are listed in section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1999). This statute

Bowe v. State

785 So. 2d 531, 2001 WL 121459

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 2, 2001 | Docket: 450219

Cited 7 times | Published

"declarant" within the definition of the hearsay rule. § 90.801(1)(b), Fla.Stat. (2000). The main justification

Lopez v. State

716 So. 2d 301, 1998 WL 422142

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 29, 1998 | Docket: 424778

Cited 7 times | Published

were admissible as non-hearsay evidence under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes. The shooter was observed

King v. State

684 So. 2d 1388, 1996 WL 726850

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 19, 1996 | Docket: 1481914

Cited 7 times | Published

hearsay. State v. Baird, 572 So.2d 904 (Fla. 1990); § 90.801, Fla.Stat. (1993). The hearsay rule does not prevent

JM v. State

665 So. 2d 1135, 1996 WL 2276

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 5, 1996 | Docket: 1351340

Cited 7 times | Published

13(6)(a), 893.03(2)(a)4., Fla. Stat. (1993). [3] See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1993). [4] The trial judge

Mason v. DIST. BD. OF BROWARD COLLEGE

644 So. 2d 160, 1994 WL 583692

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 26, 1994 | Docket: 1248437

Cited 7 times | Published

excluding the testimony of appellant's expert. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1991); Auletta v. Fried, 388

Jackson v. State

603 So. 2d 670, 1992 WL 191308

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 1992 | Docket: 68599

Cited 7 times | Published

perjury at trial or some other *672 proceeding. § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (1989); State v. Delgado-Santos

Kopko v. State

577 So. 2d 956, 1991 WL 16299

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 18, 1991 | Docket: 1654396

Cited 7 times | Published

1979). Under the present Florida hearsay rule, section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes, prior consistent statements

Bauer v. State

528 So. 2d 6, 1988 WL 48986

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 18, 1988 | Docket: 1367121

Cited 7 times | Published

S. 882, 103 S.Ct. 184, 74 L.Ed.2d 149 (1982); § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1983). Any reasonable interpretation

Williams v. State

403 So. 2d 430

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 1981 | Docket: 1250522

Cited 7 times | Published

eyewitness. We find the statement admissible under Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1978) and Van Gallon

Cullimore v. Barnett Bank of Jacksonville

386 So. 2d 894

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 19, 1980 | Docket: 477414

Cited 7 times | Published

identification of a person made after perceiving him. Section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1979). The second

Allen v. State

137 So. 3d 946, 38 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 592, 2013 WL 3466777, 2013 Fla. LEXIS 1421

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 11, 2013 | Docket: 60240447

Cited 6 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2005). “Except as provided

Powell v. State

99 So. 3d 570, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 17889, 2012 WL 4900574

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 16, 2012 | Docket: 60313102

Cited 6 times | Published

provided by statute. Hearsay is defined in section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes as “a statement, other

Parker v. State

89 So. 3d 844, 36 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 693, 2011 Fla. LEXIS 2798, 2011 WL 5984446

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 1, 2011 | Docket: 60308841

Cited 6 times | Published

whether Parker initiated contact are hearsay. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010) (“‘Hearsay’ is a statement

Davis v. State

52 So. 3d 52, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19940, 2010 WL 5540943

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 2010 | Docket: 2408250

Cited 6 times | Published

Investigator Troop's testimony as nonhearsay under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2006), which provides

Lidiano v. State

967 So. 2d 972, 2007 WL 3085356

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 2007 | Docket: 1733584

Cited 6 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2005). As defense counsel did

Essex v. State

917 So. 2d 953, 2005 WL 3478353

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 2005 | Docket: 1509424

Cited 6 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted." See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. In Szuba v. State, 749 So.2d

Zuluaga v. State

915 So. 2d 1251, 2005 WL 3479848

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 2005 | Docket: 1294125

Cited 6 times | Published

offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2004). The Florida Supreme

Vucinich v. Ross

893 So. 2d 690, 2005 WL 387541

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 18, 2005 | Docket: 1720659

Cited 6 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. The court properly allowed the

Peterson v. State

874 So. 2d 14, 2004 WL 784479

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 14, 2004 | Docket: 1738167

Cited 6 times | Published

fabrication. See Chandler, 702 So.2d at 197-98; see also § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2001). Both conditions must

Armesto v. Weidner

615 So. 2d 707, 1992 WL 367329

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 15, 1992 | Docket: 1185411

Cited 6 times | Published

its truth. Therefore, the report is not hearsay. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1991). Additionally, the probative

Arias v. State

593 So. 2d 260, 1992 WL 4083

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 14, 1992 | Docket: 446300

Cited 6 times | Published

except as permitted under the Evidence Code. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1989). Arias' objections should have

Colina v. State

570 So. 2d 929, 1990 WL 179076

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 15, 1990 | Docket: 1349806

Cited 6 times | Published

parked the car near Raymond Spells' house. Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1985), defines hearsay

Johnson v. DEPT. OF HEALTH & REHAB. SERV.

546 So. 2d 741, 1989 WL 72735

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 30, 1989 | Docket: 1730932

Cited 6 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1987). [3] Section 90.803(8)

EB v. State

531 So. 2d 1053, 1988 WL 103857

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 1988 | Docket: 2508933

Cited 6 times | Published

offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1987). Here, the purpose of

State v. Allen

519 So. 2d 1076, 1988 WL 6401

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 29, 1988 | Docket: 1698554

Cited 6 times | Published

mother were admissible under the provisions of section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1985). Merely because

Robinson v. State

455 So. 2d 481

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 9, 1984 | Docket: 1692606

Cited 6 times | Published

Lesiak's sworn statement as substantive evidence. Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1983), provides in relevant

Diamond v. State

436 So. 2d 364

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 1983 | Docket: 1701280

Cited 6 times | Published

Evidence Code, 376 So.2d 1161 (Fla. 1979). Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1981), provides in pertinent

McNeil v. State

433 So. 2d 1294

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 30, 1983 | Docket: 1727668

Cited 6 times | Published

v. State, 426 So.2d 1033 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat.

Denny v. State

404 So. 2d 824

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 13, 1981 | Docket: 1783283

Cited 6 times | Published

impeached by his prior inconsistent statements. See § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat.(1979); see generally Kellam

Cecil Shyron King v. State of Florida

260 So. 3d 985

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 2018 | Docket: 8439940

Cited 5 times | Published

presented for the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (defining hearsay as "a statement

Jenkins v. State

189 So. 3d 866, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 18811, 2015 WL 8950643

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 2015 | Docket: 60254536

Cited 5 times | Published

offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014). If the statement is

Jenkins v. State

107 So. 3d 555, 2013 WL 692821, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 3142

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 27, 2013 | Docket: 60228758

Cited 5 times | Published

in admitting certain hearsay testimony under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2010), and the admission

Benjamin v. Tandem Healthcare, Inc.

93 So. 3d 1076, 2012 WL 2400880, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 10488

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 27, 2012 | Docket: 60310426

Cited 5 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009). It is “generally inadmissible

Suarez v. Benihana National of Florida Corp.

88 So. 3d 349, 2012 WL 1605268, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 7208

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 2012 | Docket: 60308244

Cited 5 times | Published

prior inconsistent statement of Jose Suarez. See § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006) ("A statement is not

Mullis v. State

79 So. 3d 747, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 14233, 2011 WL 3962910

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 9, 2011 | Docket: 2356189

Cited 5 times | Published

investigation of Mr. Mullis would constitute hearsay. § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2010). Such testimony would be inadmissible

Ruise v. State

43 So. 3d 885, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 13316, 2010 WL 3477461

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 7, 2010 | Docket: 2398047

Cited 5 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat (2009). The GPS data is clearly

Fleitas v. State

3 So. 3d 351, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 20383, 2008 WL 5411980

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 2008 | Docket: 1653247

Cited 5 times | Published

find that they were admissible. Pursuant to section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2007), a prior consistent

Fleitas v. State

3 So. 3d 351, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 20383, 2008 WL 5411980

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 2008 | Docket: 1653247

Cited 5 times | Published

find that they were admissible. Pursuant to section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2007), a prior consistent

Yisrael v. State

986 So. 2d 491, 2008 WL 450398

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 2008 | Docket: 1428493

Cited 5 times | Published

the letter constituted a "statement" under section 90.801(1)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (2004). See id.

Cedillo v. State

949 So. 2d 339, 2007 WL 601606

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 2007 | Docket: 1719896

Cited 5 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2005). Marzulli was the declarant

In Re LC

947 So. 2d 1240, 2007 WL 258144

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 31, 2007 | Docket: 1720448

Cited 5 times | Published

the document was hearsay. § 90.801(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). Section 90.801(2)(a) provides an exception

Dendy v. State

896 So. 2d 800, 2005 WL 292441

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 9, 2005 | Docket: 1683530

Cited 5 times | Published

admissible as a prior consistent statement under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2002). See Chamberlain

Simmons v. State

782 So. 2d 1000, 2001 WL 417308

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 25, 2001 | Docket: 456322

Cited 5 times | Published

excluded from the definition of hearsay under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1999). The statements

Wilcox v. State

770 So. 2d 733, 2000 WL 1671517

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 8, 2000 | Docket: 1779338

Cited 5 times | Published

under conditions meeting the requirements of section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes, they remained hearsay

Buchanan v. State

743 So. 2d 59, 1999 WL 641445

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 25, 1999 | Docket: 1243110

Cited 5 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. *61 (1997). If testimony is

Fernandez v. State

722 So. 2d 879, 1998 WL 821725

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 25, 1998 | Docket: 1241483

Cited 5 times | Published

a statement of identification is not hearsay, § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995), if the person making

Chatman v. State

687 So. 2d 860, 1997 WL 23144

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 16, 1997 | Docket: 1718858

Cited 5 times | Published

asserted." Fla.Evid. Code § 90.801(1)(c). As we have said in the past: Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes

Hitchcock v. State

636 So. 2d 572, 1994 WL 178051

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 11, 1994 | Docket: 1715299

Cited 5 times | Published

DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129, 1135 (Fla. 1986). Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1993), defines hearsay as

Harrison v. Housing Resources Mgt., Inc.

588 So. 2d 64, 1991 WL 224977

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 1991 | Docket: 1708470

Cited 5 times | Published

and thus, they were not hearsay as defined in section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes. Moreover, we see little

Dykes v. Quincy Telephone Co.

539 So. 2d 503, 1989 WL 12444

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 15, 1989 | Docket: 452812

Cited 5 times | Published

remanding for further proceedings. NOTES [1] Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1983), provides: "`Hearsay'

Bianchi v. State

528 So. 2d 1309, 1988 WL 80905

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 3, 1988 | Docket: 1717283

Cited 5 times | Published

DCA 1988). The one exception to this rule is section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1985) which provides:

Smelley v. State

500 So. 2d 318, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 114

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 1986 | Docket: 1295289

Cited 5 times | Published

pertinent to this particular issue is set forth in Section 90.801(2)(b) of the Evidence Code, which provides

Tisdale v. State

498 So. 2d 1280, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2282

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 29, 1986 | Docket: 1335597

Cited 5 times | Published

One view is that a proper construction of section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1983), precludes admissibility

Graham v. State

479 So. 2d 824, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2756

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 13, 1985 | Docket: 463619

Cited 5 times | Published

The disputed testimony was inadmissible hearsay. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1983). This testimony was potentially

Lake Cnty. Sheriff's Dept. v. Unemp. App. Com'n

478 So. 2d 880

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 21, 1985 | Docket: 1484448

Cited 5 times | Published

Hearsay, on the other hand, is defined by section 90.801(c), Florida Statutes (1983) as: [A] statement

Mazzara v. State

437 So. 2d 716

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 26, 1983 | Docket: 1675129

Cited 5 times | Published

in some court proceeding, the provisions of Section 90.801(2)(a) do not apply, and the testimony concerning

State v. Moore

424 So. 2d 920

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 29, 1982 | Docket: 1297259

Cited 5 times | Published

but only for impeachment, are now modified by Section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), which provides:

194th St. Hotel Corp. v. Hopf

383 So. 2d 739

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 13, 1980 | Docket: 457397

Cited 5 times | Published

Fountain, Inc., 327 So.2d 39 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976); § 90.801(1), Fla. Stat. (1979). In any case, whether treated

Arce v. Wackenhut Corp.

40 So. 3d 813, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 9869, 2010 WL 2670881

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 7, 2010 | Docket: 1667158

Cited 4 times | Published

hearsay statement unless an exception applies. See § 90.801(c), Fla. Stat. (2008) (“‘Hearsay’ is a statement

Yisrael v. State

993 So. 2d 952, 33 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 577, 2008 Fla. LEXIS 223, 2008 WL 5083515

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 21, 2008 | Docket: 64856305

Cited 4 times | Published

the letter constituted a “statement” under section 90.801(1)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (2004). See id.

Dorsey v. Reddy

931 So. 2d 259, 2006 WL 1707986

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2006 | Docket: 1522298

Cited 4 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1999); see also Diaz v. State

Powell v. State

908 So. 2d 1185, 2005 WL 2045447

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 26, 2005 | Docket: 2544851

Cited 4 times | Published

other than proving the truth of its contents. See § 90.801(1)(c). "A nonhearsay statement, however, is admissible

Presley v. State

839 So. 2d 813, 2003 WL 728887

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 2003 | Docket: 1708039

Cited 4 times | Published

See Puryear v. State, 810 So.2d 901 (Fla. 2002); § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2001).[1] Nor do we find a

AEB v. State

818 So. 2d 534, 2002 WL 53877

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 16, 2002 | Docket: 1652844

Cited 4 times | Published

identification pursuant to section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2000). Section 90.801(2)(c) provides that

Puryear v. State

774 So. 2d 846, 2000 WL 1873054

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 2000 | Docket: 1331093

Cited 4 times | Published

robbery were admissible as non-hearsay under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1999), as statements

Szuba v. State

749 So. 2d 551, 2000 WL 24888

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 14, 2000 | Docket: 1690432

Cited 4 times | Published

consistent statement, and thus admissible under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1997). Mr. Gibson's

Keffer v. State

687 So. 2d 256, 1996 WL 736594

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 1996 | Docket: 1370596

Cited 4 times | Published

consistent statements" and admitted the testimony. Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1995), provides that

Ford v. State

678 So. 2d 432, 1996 WL 426428

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 31, 1996 | Docket: 2572201

Cited 4 times | Published

witness did not testify at the revocation hearing. § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995); Harrell v. State, 647

Lark v. State

617 So. 2d 782, 1993 WL 132612

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 28, 1993 | Docket: 1512572

Cited 4 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Section 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1989). A statement is "an

FLA. DEPT., LAW ENFORCEMENT v. Dukes

484 So. 2d 645, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 639

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 12, 1986 | Docket: 1344023

Cited 4 times | Published

investigator would not be admissible under section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (1983)[2] were this not

Moore v. State

473 So. 2d 686

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 1984 | Docket: 451714

Cited 4 times | Published

reversed and held that the Florida Evidence Code, Section 90.801(2)(a) authorizes the use of prior inconsistent

Spicer v. Metropolitan Dade County

458 So. 2d 792

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 16, 1984 | Docket: 1453467

Cited 4 times | Published

criminal trial did constitute hearsay under Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1983), since it was

Odom v. Wekiva Concrete Products

443 So. 2d 331

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 1983 | Docket: 1458541

Cited 4 times | Published

obviously hearsay under the rules of evidence. See Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1981). Although Section

Coxwell v. State

397 So. 2d 335

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 7, 1981 | Docket: 1357720

Cited 4 times | Published

before its effective date, we note that under Section 90.801(1)(c) appellant's statements would not technically

Gayle v. State

216 So. 3d 656, 2017 WL 1403607, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5368

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 19, 2017 | Docket: 60265462

Cited 3 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2015). “Except as provided

State of Florida v. Kyle R. Queior

191 So. 3d 388, 41 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 154, 2016 WL 1592740, 2016 Fla. LEXIS 841

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 2016 | Docket: 3056547

Cited 3 times | Published

) (explaining that “hearsay,” as defined in section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes, is an out-of-

Toney Deron Davis v. State of Florida

136 So. 3d 1169, 2014 WL 1408553

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 2014 | Docket: 56897

Cited 3 times | Published

inconsistent statement to impeach Williams under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1995). And while defense

J.B. v. State

166 So. 3d 813, 2014 WL 837006, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 2977

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 2014 | Docket: 60248402

Cited 3 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2011). This hearsay statement

Caballero v. State

132 So. 3d 369, 2014 WL 537448, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 1843

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 12, 2014 | Docket: 60238445

Cited 3 times | Published

its contents.” Id. at 1038 (citing, inter alia, § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (1997) (“ ‘Hearsay’ is a statement

Brilhart v. Brilhart ex rel. S.L.B.

116 So. 3d 617, 2013 WL 3335023, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 10703

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 3, 2013 | Docket: 60232419

Cited 3 times | Published

and expressions of his subjective concern. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2012). Unsubstantiated statements

Jean-Philippe v. State

123 So. 3d 1071, 38 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 409, 2013 WL 2631159, 2013 Fla. LEXIS 1183

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 13, 2013 | Docket: 60234852

Cited 3 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009). A statement may, however

Merritt v. State

109 So. 3d 306, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 3531, 2013 WL 811639

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 2013 | Docket: 60229557

Cited 3 times | Published

was little.” L.P.’s statement was hearsay. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010). The trial court properly

Holborough v. State

103 So. 3d 221, 2012 WL 5933008, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20448

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 28, 2012 | Docket: 60227007

Cited 3 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010). The victim’s “Florida

Mortimer v. State

100 So. 3d 99, 2012 WL 3711413, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14492

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 2012 | Docket: 60226109

Cited 3 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter[s] asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010). Because no statutory

State v. Bowers

87 So. 3d 704, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 136, 2012 WL 572972, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 429

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 23, 2012 | Docket: 60308036

Cited 3 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2007); see also Breedlove v

TORRES-MATMOROS v. State

34 So. 3d 83, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 4512, 2010 WL 1329962

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 7, 2010 | Docket: 2410188

Cited 3 times | Published

thus did not run afoul of the hearsay rule. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009) (defining "hearsay" as

FARINACCI v. State

29 So. 3d 1212, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 3325, 2010 WL 934018

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 17, 2010 | Docket: 1136303

Cited 3 times | Published

recitation of out-of-court statements by the victim. Section 90.801(1)(a)2 expressly defines hearsay to embrace

White v. State

993 So. 2d 611, 2008 WL 4755342

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 2008 | Docket: 2548294

Cited 3 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Evid.Code. Both of the offenses with

Thomas v. State

993 So. 2d 105, 2008 WL 4629572

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 21, 2008 | Docket: 1516371

Cited 3 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted," § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2007), is inadmissible, unless

Butler v. State

970 So. 2d 919, 2007 WL 4561593

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 2007 | Docket: 1695272

Cited 3 times | Published

estimate constituted hearsay as defined in section 90.801(c), Florida Statutes (2006), and was inadmissible

Pollock v. CCC INVESTMENTS I, LLC

933 So. 2d 572, 2006 WL 1409129

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 24, 2006 | Docket: 1309243

Cited 3 times | Published

truth of the matter contained in the statement. § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1991). The state acknowledged that

Rutherford v. State

902 So. 2d 211, 2005 WL 1026628

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 4, 2005 | Docket: 1675052

Cited 3 times | Published

of Nowell's statement was non-hearsay under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2004). See Stanford

Diaz v. State

890 So. 2d 556, 2005 WL 74063

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 14, 2005 | Docket: 1290727

Cited 3 times | Published

Hutchinson v. State, 882 So.2d 943 (Fla.2004) (citing § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2003)). Hearsay statements

Valley v. State

860 So. 2d 464, 2003 WL 22442922

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 29, 2003 | Docket: 2536224

Cited 3 times | Published

November 23rd robbery as Valley. Pursuant to section 90.801, Florida Statutes, (2002), an out of court

Beber v. State

853 So. 2d 576, 2003 WL 22056036

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 5, 2003 | Docket: 1660279

Cited 3 times | Published

inconsistent statements were admitted pursuant to section 90.801(2)(a),[6] a different hearsay exception than

Stotler v. State

834 So. 2d 940, 2003 WL 142286

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 22, 2003 | Docket: 1697585

Cited 3 times | Published

depicted on the videotape are not hearsay under section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2001). They are "statements

Reid v. State

799 So. 2d 394, 2001 WL 1414529

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 14, 2001 | Docket: 1278371

Cited 3 times | Published

Cardali v. State, 701 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1997). Appellant next argues

Neal v. State

792 So. 2d 613, 2001 WL 946194

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 22, 2001 | Docket: 1735421

Cited 3 times | Published

that this testimony was inadmissible hearsay. Section 90.801(2)(b) provides that a statement is not hearsay

Neal v. State

792 So. 2d 613, 2001 WL 946194

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 22, 2001 | Docket: 1735421

Cited 3 times | Published

that this testimony was inadmissible hearsay. Section 90.801(2)(b) provides that a statement is not hearsay

Miller v. State

780 So. 2d 277, 2001 WL 219299

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 7, 2001 | Docket: 1298411

Cited 3 times | Published

of a person made after perceiving the person." § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1999). As explained by Professor

Lewis v. State

777 So. 2d 452, 2001 WL 121082

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 14, 2001 | Docket: 1513959

Cited 3 times | Published

the defendant was admissible at trial under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2000). Since Dameus

Millien v. State

766 So. 2d 475, 2000 WL 1345946

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 20, 2000 | Docket: 1329415

Cited 3 times | Published

that this evidence was inadmissible hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1997). Millien presented several

Doe v. Broward County School Bd.

744 So. 2d 1068, 1999 WL 743613

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 22, 1999 | Docket: 1380570

Cited 3 times | Published

treatment exception, they were admissible under section 90.801(2)(b) as prior consistent statements by the

Neilson v. State

713 So. 2d 1110, 1998 WL 412443

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 24, 1998 | Docket: 1450187

Cited 3 times | Published

of a person made after perceiving the person." § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat.

Brown v. International Paper Co.

710 So. 2d 666, 1998 WL 193115

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 1998 | Docket: 1445360

Cited 3 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1995). The report and the letter

Hotelera Naco, Inc. v. Chinea

708 So. 2d 961, 1998 WL 65264

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 22, 1998 | Docket: 1528317

Cited 3 times | Published

evidence was not inadmissible as hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995); Hunt v. Seaboard Coast

Ferreira v. State

692 So. 2d 264, 1997 WL 199176

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 25, 1997 | Docket: 436118

Cited 3 times | Published

time to the crime to justify its use under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1995). We reject appellant's

State v. Dupree

656 So. 2d 430, 1995 WL 215026

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 1995 | Docket: 1283485

Cited 3 times | Published

raise the issue of hearsay admissibility under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1993). However, this

Belcher v. State

646 So. 2d 231, 1994 WL 576096

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 21, 1994 | Docket: 1405425

Cited 3 times | Published

correct. This testimony is not hearsay[3] under section 90.801 which provides: (2) A statement is not hearsay

Belcher v. State

646 So. 2d 231, 1994 WL 576096

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 21, 1994 | Docket: 1405425

Cited 3 times | Published

correct. This testimony is not hearsay[3] under section 90.801 which provides: (2) A statement is not hearsay

Sibley v. State

636 So. 2d 893, 1994 WL 195238

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 20, 1994 | Docket: 1715234

Cited 3 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1993). The issue at trial was

Nelson v. State

602 So. 2d 550, 1992 WL 9702

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 24, 1992 | Docket: 1321422

Cited 3 times | Published

action is intended by the actor as an assertion. § 90.801(1)(a)(2), Fla. Stat. (1989). The prosecutor must

Specialty Linings, Inc. v. BF Goodrich Co.

532 So. 2d 1121, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2376, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4643, 1988 WL 109644

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 21, 1988 | Docket: 450484

Cited 3 times | Published

records exception to the hearsay rule. We agree. Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1987), defines hearsay as:

Kirkland v. State

509 So. 2d 1105, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 411

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 1987 | Docket: 1361745

Cited 3 times | Published

sworn complaint was received in evidence under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), for purposes

Perez v. State

474 So. 2d 398, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1990

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 1985 | Docket: 1487659

Cited 3 times | Published

cross-examination; such a statement is not hearsay. § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1983). [2] The Rule provides:

Wilson v. State

434 So. 2d 59

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 1983 | Docket: 2532465

Cited 3 times | Published

McElveen v. State, 415 So.2d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); § 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes. The order appealed is

Roop v. State

228 So. 3d 633, 2017 WL 4393245

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 4, 2017 | Docket: 6163423

Cited 2 times | Published

should still be admissible. . Pursuant to section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2014), such a statement

Khalid Ali Pasha v. State of Florida

225 So. 3d 688, 42 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 569, 2017 WL 1954975, 2017 Fla. LEXIS 1067

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 11, 2017 | Docket: 6060823

Cited 2 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2012). The excited utterance

Randy W. Tundidor v. State of Florida

221 So. 3d 587, 42 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 507, 2017 WL 1506854, 2017 Fla. LEXIS 925

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 27, 2017 | Docket: 5813559

Cited 2 times | Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication.” § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat- in this case, the trial court

Carter v. State

226 So. 3d 268, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5786, 2017 WL 1496270

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 2017 | Docket: 60274314

Cited 2 times | Published

statement.” Larzelere, 676 So.2d at 402 (quoting § 90.801(1)). However, the statute has not abandoned the

Washburn v. Washburn

211 So. 3d 87

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 25, 2017 | Docket: 60262707

Cited 2 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2015). “Except as provided by statute

James Justin Channell v. State of Florida

200 So. 3d 247, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 14755, 2016 WL 5746645

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 4, 2016 | Docket: 4468674

Cited 2 times | Published

GPS data. 43 So.3d at 886; see also § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014) (defining hearsay as

Marvin Cannon v. State of Florida

180 So. 3d 1023, 40 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 509, 2015 Fla. LEXIS 2033, 2015 WL 5601524

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 24, 2015 | Docket: 2851201

Cited 2 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010). Rather than indicating

Kristy S. Holt v. Calchas, LLC

155 So. 3d 499, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 1039, 40 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 296

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 28, 2015 | Docket: 2628637

Cited 2 times | Published

affidavits should have been sustained. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013). 3 The bank

Richard R. Mcdade v. State of Florida

154 So. 3d 292, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 752, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 3681, 2014 WL 6977944

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 2014 | Docket: 2613861

Cited 2 times | Published

explained that: Hearsay is defined in section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2005), as “a statement

Billy Jim Sheppard, Jr. v. State of Florida

151 So. 3d 1154, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 551, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 2717, 2014 WL 4360250

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 4, 2014 | Docket: 1167682

Cited 2 times | Published

therefore hearsay that should have been excluded. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013) (defining hearsay as

Taylor v. State

146 So. 3d 113, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 13453, 2014 WL 4249749

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 2014 | Docket: 60242808

Cited 2 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(D(c), Fla. Stat. (2013). Hearsay is inadmissible

Jones v. State

127 So. 3d 622, 2013 WL 5729927, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 16766

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 23, 2013 | Docket: 60236786

Cited 2 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2008). Hearsay also includes

State v. Sims

110 So. 3d 113, 2013 WL 1194940, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 5047

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 25, 2013 | Docket: 60230182

Cited 2 times | Published

does not qualify as substantive evidence under section 90.801(2)(a) of the Evidence Code. The statement was

Shorter v. State

98 So. 3d 685, 2012 WL 4511305, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 16720

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 3, 2012 | Docket: 60312524

Cited 2 times | Published

keypad). The *690report is hearsay as defined by section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes.3 Hearsay is not admissible

Harris v. Grunow

71 So. 3d 186, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 15285, 2011 WL 4467379

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 28, 2011 | Docket: 2356331

Cited 2 times | Published

pertinent elements of that rule are identical to section 90.801. [3] During that cross-examination, counsel

State v. Littles

68 So. 3d 976, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 13901, 2011 WL 3861577

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 2, 2011 | Docket: 60302411

Cited 2 times | Published

offered for the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009) (Hearsay is “a statement

Dortch v. State

63 So. 3d 904, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 9250, 2011 WL 2437411

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 20, 2011 | Docket: 2361035

Cited 2 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted." See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009). Officer Andres' testimony

Osagie v. State

58 So. 3d 307, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2664, 2011 WL 710175

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 2011 | Docket: 60299309

Cited 2 times | Published

under review is reversed and remanded. . See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2007) (" ‘Hearsay’ is a statement

Corbett v. Wilson

48 So. 3d 131, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 17701, 2010 WL 4666050

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 19, 2010 | Docket: 2397075

Cited 2 times | Published

admissible as substantive evidence pursuant to section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes, as a prior inconsistent

Polite v. State

41 So. 3d 935, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 10455, 35 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1574

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 2010 | Docket: 358534

Cited 2 times | Published

These cases are based upon the language of section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes, which defines an out-of-court

Woodall v. State

39 So. 3d 419, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 9210, 2010 WL 2539429

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 2010 | Docket: 2409195

Cited 2 times | Published

offered, and is subject to cross-examination. § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2009); Pearce v. State, 880

KRAMPERT v. State

13 So. 3d 170, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 7465, 2009 WL 1636972

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 2009 | Docket: 1189041

Cited 2 times | Published

explain Krampert's own subsequent conduct. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2007); Penalver v. State, 926

JBJ v. State

17 So. 3d 312, 2009 WL 1586819

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 2009 | Docket: 1141884

Cited 2 times | Published

State responded that it was admissible under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes, as a prior consistent

SL v. State

993 So. 2d 1108, 2008 WL 4489253

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 8, 2008 | Docket: 1516170

Cited 2 times | Published

hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition." § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006) (emphasis added). Interpreting

Ross v. State

993 So. 2d 1026, 2008 WL 183701

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 23, 2008 | Docket: 1515998

Cited 2 times | Published

the hearsay exception for identification. See § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2004). The court overruled

Jackson v. State

961 So. 2d 1104, 2007 WL 2212706

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 3, 2007 | Docket: 468788

Cited 2 times | Published

hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition." § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2005); Pearce v. State, 880

Wilson v. State

842 So. 2d 237, 2003 WL 1823497

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 9, 2003 | Docket: 278133

Cited 2 times | Published

Accordingly, the evidence was inadmissible hearsay, see § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2002), and the trial court erred

K.V. v. State

832 So. 2d 264, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 18109

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 2002 | Docket: 64819462

Cited 2 times | Published

sentence for burglary and remand for a new trial. Section 90.801, Florida Statutes, defines hearsay as “a statement

Allen v. State

789 So. 2d 1154, 2001 WL 746648

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 5, 2001 | Docket: 1696034

Cited 2 times | Published

of a person made after perceiving the person." § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1999). We agree with the Fourth

Kent v. State

704 So. 2d 121, 1997 WL 633941

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 15, 1997 | Docket: 1354876

Cited 2 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1995); Chatman v. State

Brantley v. State

692 So. 2d 282, 1997 WL 203657

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 28, 1997 | Docket: 2561146

Cited 2 times | Published

prior inconsistent statement is admitted under section 90.801(2)(a) or section 90.803(23)," Florida Statutes

Beaulieu v. State

671 So. 2d 807, 1996 WL 111761

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 15, 1996 | Docket: 1248197

Cited 2 times | Published

influence, motive or recent fabrication. See section 90.801(2)(b), Fla.Stat. Most often, the psychologist's

Wykle v. State

659 So. 2d 1287, 1995 WL 516434

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 1, 1995 | Docket: 1462430

Cited 2 times | Published

also Pardo v. State, 596 So.2d 665 (Fla. 1992); § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1991). Wykle first contends that

House v. State

614 So. 2d 677, 1993 WL 55638

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 1993 | Docket: 449438

Cited 2 times | Published

records" exception, on which the state relied. See section 90.801, 90.802 and 90.803(6), Florida Statutes (1989);

Mense v. State

570 So. 2d 1390, 1990 WL 205856

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 1990 | Docket: 1349139

Cited 2 times | Published

State v. Baird, 572 So.2d 904 (1990). "Under section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1987), hearsay is

Wm v. Dept. of Health & Rehab. Servs.

553 So. 2d 274, 1989 WL 142198

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 28, 1989 | Docket: 1258512

Cited 2 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1987). And while hearsay is

Morrison v. State

546 So. 2d 102, 1989 WL 73811

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 7, 1989 | Docket: 1730944

Cited 2 times | Published

of her position disclosed to the same jury. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1985); United States v. Wenzel, 311

Barnes v. State

477 So. 2d 6, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2201

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 20, 1985 | Docket: 1320876

Cited 2 times | Published

became known and prosecuted and are not hearsay. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1983). We also conclude that

Adams v. School Bd. of Brevard County

470 So. 2d 760

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 30, 1985 | Docket: 1676617

Cited 2 times | Published

applied to the other students, it was hearsay, § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1983). However, hearsay is

Pierce v. Mims

418 So. 2d 273

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 1982 | Docket: 1288894

Cited 2 times | Published

offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1981) (emphasis added). The statements

MARLON A. ELLISON v. STATE OF FLORIDA

271 So. 3d 1045

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 29, 2019 | Docket: 15688833

Cited 1 times | Published

(Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (citation omitted). Section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2016), states: “A

EARL L. BOGGESS v. STATE OF FLORIDA

269 So. 3d 616

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 2019 | Docket: 14909118

Cited 1 times | Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication.” § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2016) (emphasis added); see

Mendez v. State

271 So. 3d 1093

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 13, 2019 | Docket: 14549571

Cited 1 times | Published

not as prior inconsistent statements under section 90.801(2)(a). Although the rule set forth in Baugh

GOLDBOURNE ONEIL HENRY v. STATE OF FLORIDA

264 So. 3d 182

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 23, 2019 | Docket: 13588108

Cited 1 times | Published

would be hearsay under Florida’s hearsay rule. Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2014), defines “hearsay”

In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2017-09.

238 So. 3d 192

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 8, 2018 | Docket: 6327897

Cited 1 times | Published

testimony at a trial, hearing or other proceeding ( § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat.) or statements by a defendant

J.J.J. v. State

235 So. 3d 1014

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 2017 | Docket: 60286094

Cited 1 times | Published

775 So.2d 263, 274 (Fla. 2000) (first citing § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1999); and then citing Wright

PHILIP MORRIS USA INC., and R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO CO. v. ROSE POLLARI, etc

228 So. 3d 115

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 30, 2017 | Docket: 6145382

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(e), Fla. Stat. (2015). Hearsay statements are

Reid v. State

222 So. 3d 575, 2017 WL 2664703, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 8963

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 2017 | Docket: 60269764

Cited 1 times | Published

identification under Section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2012). Section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes

North v. State

221 So. 3d 1235, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 8488, 2017 WL 2484944

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 2017 | Docket: 6071530

Cited 1 times | Published

prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013) (emphasis added). Certain

Gudmestad v. State

209 So. 3d 602, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17987

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 7, 2016 | Docket: 4550697

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. Defense counsel clearly did

Rolle v. State

215 So. 3d 75, 2016 WL 5939715, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 15117

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 13, 2016 | Docket: 4478836

Cited 1 times | Published

Agenor’s statements qualify as hearsay under section 90.801, Florida Statutes (2013), we conclude that

Johnson v. State

199 So. 3d 433, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 12802, 2016 WL 4468189

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 24, 2016 | Docket: 60256601

Cited 1 times | Published

the men who participated in the incident. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2015) (“ ‘Hearsay’ is a statement

Kevin R. Laing v. State

200 So. 3d 166, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 9677, 2016 WL 3458768

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 24, 2016 | Docket: 3091557

Cited 1 times | Published

dates. This is definitive hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2015). No effort was made to

& SC12-2619 Pablo Ibar v. State of Florida and Pablo Ibar v. Julie L. Jones, etc.

190 So. 3d 1012, 2016 WL 454038

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 4, 2016 | Docket: 3033792

Cited 1 times | Published

"statements of identification” as contemplated by section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1995); (2) whether

Ronald Smith v. State of Florida

186 So. 3d 1056, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 214, 2016 WL 64341

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 6, 2016 | Docket: 3026022

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(e), Fla. Stat. (2012). “Except as provided

Charlie Wyne v. State of Florida

189 So. 3d 840, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 11408, 2015 WL 4549489

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 29, 2015 | Docket: 2679173

Cited 1 times | Published

that the statement was proper pursuant to section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (2013), which provides:

Johnny Shane Kormondy v. State of Florida

154 So. 3d 341, 40 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 5, 2015 Fla. LEXIS 1, 2015 WL 48045

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 5, 2015 | Docket: 2620949

Cited 1 times | Published

reportedly said, constitutes hearsay. See § 90.801(l)(e), Fla. Stat. (2014); see also Wyatt

Alan Lyndell Wade v. State of Florida

156 So. 3d 1004, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 757, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 3679, 2014 WL 6978020

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 2014 | Docket: 2613920

Cited 1 times | Published

the definition of the hearsay rule.” (quoting § 90.801(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (2000))). In light of these

Caldwell v. State

137 So. 3d 590, 2014 WL 1686465, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 6214

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 30, 2014 | Docket: 60240380

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2012). Booking reports are

Shiba v. Gabay

120 So. 3d 80, 2013 WL 4006132, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 12363

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 7, 2013 | Docket: 60234270

Cited 1 times | Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication.” § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. Nevertheless, “[a] prior consistent

J.G. v. State

114 So. 3d 1078, 2013 WL 2494714, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 9266

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 2013 | Docket: 60231741

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2011). Such “statement” can

J.G. v. State

114 So. 3d 1078, 2013 WL 2494714, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 9266

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 2013 | Docket: 60231741

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2011). Such “statement” can

Carter v. State

115 So. 3d 1031, 2013 WL 2420442, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8862

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 2013 | Docket: 60232056

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010) (internal quotation marks

Thomas v. State

125 So. 3d 928, 2013 WL 1980256, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 7863

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 15, 2013 | Docket: 60236121

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2008). Hearsay is inadmissible

Tolbert v. State

114 So. 3d 291, 2013 WL 1810609, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 6936

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 1, 2013 | Docket: 60231837

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2011). Written reports are

Massey v. State

109 So. 3d 324, 2013 WL 1136404, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 4409

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 20, 2013 | Docket: 60229567

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010). The Supreme Court has

Diaz v. State

106 So. 3d 515, 2013 WL 466219, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 1999

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 2013 | Docket: 60228249

Cited 1 times | Published

That’s not hearsay. COURT: Okay, overruled. Section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2010), defines hearsay

Walker v. State

83 So. 3d 840, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 19540, 2011 WL 6057923

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 7, 2011 | Docket: 2413528

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(a)1. & (c), Fla. Stat. (2009). Walker was seeking

Broomfield v. State

82 So. 3d 1030, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 13738, 2011 WL 3820040

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 31, 2011 | Docket: 1228421

Cited 1 times | Published

That testimony did not constitute hearsay. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2009). Lastly, we find no error in

PIERRE-CHARLES v. State

67 So. 3d 301, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5190, 2011 WL 1376969

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 2011 | Docket: 2363051

Cited 1 times | Published

jury returned a guilty verdict. II. Analysis Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2009), defines hearsay

Ortuno v. State

54 So. 3d 1086, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2644, 2011 WL 714313

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 2011 | Docket: 60298239

Cited 1 times | Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication[.] § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2009). The window of admissibility

Ortuno v. State

54 So. 3d 1086, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2644, 2011 WL 714313

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 2011 | Docket: 60298239

Cited 1 times | Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication[.] § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2009). The window of admissibility

AVILEZ v. State

50 So. 3d 1189, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19444, 2010 WL 5173792

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 22, 2010 | Docket: 2542573

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2004). Meredith testified that

Riggins v. State

67 So. 3d 244, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 17177, 2010 WL 4484629

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 2010 | Docket: 60302078

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1). Thus, “[t]he unverified writing of a third

In Re of Rk

38 So. 3d 859, 2010 WL 2508845

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2010 | Docket: 1182494

Cited 1 times | Published

sworn or otherwise met the requirements of section 90.801(2)(a). And the requirements for the admission

SDT v. State

33 So. 3d 779, 2010 WL 1564584

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 2010 | Docket: 1649699

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2008). For the purpose of a

Walden v. State

17 So. 3d 795, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 11326, 2009 WL 2475148

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 14, 2009 | Docket: 1645155

Cited 1 times | Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted," § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2007), and is not admissible

Aime v. State

4 So. 3d 57, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1265, 2009 WL 383558

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 18, 2009 | Docket: 60295080

Cited 1 times | Published

sole evidence of guilt and must comport with section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2007). Pearce v. State

Deans v. State

988 So. 2d 1271, 2008 WL 3978207

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 2008 | Docket: 1384470

Cited 1 times | Published

detective's testimony was admissible under the section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1998), exception to

Cassidy v. McNeil

621 F. Supp. 2d 1222, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109195, 2008 WL 2567658

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 24, 2008 | Docket: 1888040

Cited 1 times | Published

identifications made at a later time. See Fla. Stat. 90.801(2)(c). [18] See Reply at 9. [19] For the

Jenkins v. State

963 So. 2d 263, 2007 WL 2089042

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 24, 2007 | Docket: 1328468

Cited 1 times | Published

occurred for which he had personal knowledge. See § 90.801(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). Appellant's probation was

Longval v. State

914 So. 2d 1098, 2005 WL 3180036

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 30, 2005 | Docket: 1781816

Cited 1 times | Published

Longval's statements to Hile were not hearsay under section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2004), because they

Nurse v. State

932 So. 2d 290, 2005 WL 3077212

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 18, 2005 | Docket: 1285751

Cited 1 times | Published

upon notations made by a forensic specialist. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2003) (defining hearsay as

Baugh v. State

862 So. 2d 756, 2003 WL 22459116

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 2003 | Docket: 1762791

Cited 1 times | Published

statements made under oath for purposes of section 90.801(2)(a), but they could have been admitted under

Baugh v. State

862 So. 2d 756, 2003 WL 22459116

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 2003 | Docket: 1762791

Cited 1 times | Published

statements made under oath for purposes of section 90.801(2)(a), but they could have been admitted under

Acosta v. State

825 So. 2d 1076, 2002 WL 31060357

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 18, 2002 | Docket: 1691259

Cited 1 times | Published

clear in his objection, classic hearsay testimony. § 90.801(c), Fla. Stat. (2001). In Szuba v. State, 749

Perry v. State

817 So. 2d 985, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1254

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 29, 2002 | Docket: 1430040

Cited 1 times | Published

of a person made after perceiving the person. § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2001). Here, the declarant

Pedrosa v. State

781 So. 2d 470, 2001 WL 246036

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 14, 2001 | Docket: 1690549

Cited 1 times | Published

testifies at trial" (citation omitted)); see also § 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1997). Although her statements

Hebel v. State

765 So. 2d 143, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 7846, 2000 WL 801153

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2000 | Docket: 64799684

Cited 1 times | Published

court found their statements were governed by section 90.801(2)(b), which authorizes the admission of prior

Liscinsky v. State

700 So. 2d 171, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11551, 1997 WL 631865

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 15, 1997 | Docket: 64776128

Cited 1 times | Published

court and testifies to that effect at trial. See § 90.801(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). See also Power v. State

Cortes v. State

670 So. 2d 119, 1996 WL 93745

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 1996 | Docket: 1245700

Cited 1 times | Published

admission of prior statements is governed by section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1991), which states:

JJH v. State

651 So. 2d 1239, 1995 WL 96309

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 10, 1995 | Docket: 476720

Cited 1 times | Published

admitted as substantive evidence pursuant to *1241 section 90.801(2)(a)[3] of the Florida Statutes, a criminal

Dennis v. State

649 So. 2d 263, 1994 WL 718731

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 1994 | Docket: 1320662

Cited 1 times | Published

child testified in court. See § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (1991). Section 90.801(2)(a) reads in pertinent part:

Escoto v. State

624 So. 2d 836, 1993 WL 382991

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 1, 1993 | Docket: 475226

Cited 1 times | Published

of recent fabrication and improper influence. § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1987). However, there was no

Coluntino v. State

620 So. 2d 244, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 6672, 1993 WL 216982

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 22, 1993 | Docket: 64697045

Cited 1 times | Published

influence, motive, or recent fabrication.” Section 90.801(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (1991). In order to fall under

Harris v. State

580 So. 2d 243, 1991 WL 75557

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 1991 | Docket: 1716526

Cited 1 times | Published

were "clearly hearsay" within the meaning of section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1979), as construed by this

Parnell v. State

500 So. 2d 558, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2273

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 29, 1986 | Docket: 1295281

Cited 1 times | Published

against the appellant. It is true that under Section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1983), prior inconsistent

In the Interest of S.C. v. State

471 So. 2d 1326, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1565, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14867

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 1985 | Docket: 64612870

Cited 1 times | Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (1983). A review of the transcript

Brunelle v. State

456 So. 2d 1324, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2172, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15369

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 10, 1984 | Docket: 64607245

Cited 1 times | Published

statement cannot be classified “non-hearsay” under Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1981)1 as it was not

Reed v. State

438 So. 2d 169, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 21802

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 22, 1983 | Docket: 64599764

Cited 1 times | Published

in fact hearsay and therefore inadmissible. Section 90.-801(l)(c) defines hearsay as “a statement, other

McCray v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 13, 2025 | Docket: 71098305

Published

Hearsay statute Section 90.801, Florida Statutes, defines hearsay as “a statement

Steven Matthew Wolf v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 31, 2025 | Docket: 70749418

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2022). “Except as provided

Steven Matthew Wolf v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 2025 | Docket: 70749418

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2022). “Except as provided

Corey Stephen Smith v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 27, 2025 | Docket: 70650233

Published

appeal.” Id. Hearsay is defined in Section 90.801(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2023), as “a statement

Corey Stephen Smith v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 27, 2025 | Docket: 70650233

Published

appeal.” Id. Hearsay is defined in Section 90.801(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2023), as “a statement

Eloyn Ingraham v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 19, 2025 | Docket: 69755644

Published

was self-serving hearsay and inadmissible. See § 90.801(b), Fla. Stat. (2023). According to the State

Fernando Garlobo v. the State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 2, 2025 | Docket: 69511748

Published

that it is inadmissible for another.” Id. Section 90.801(2)(c) provides a hearsay exception for statements

Leo L. Boatman v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 17, 2024 | Docket: 69270921

Published

“to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2019). Boatman’s statement

Struggs v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 21, 2024 | Docket: 69062884

Published

admitted as a statement of identification. Section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes, provides that “[a]

Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Michael Jordan Lipp, etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 2024 | Docket: 68380016

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(b), Fla. Stat. “However, the same statement

McKenzie v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 10, 2024 | Docket: 68149041

Published

statement of identification and was not hearsay. See § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2022). The statement that Appellant

M. D. M. v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 6, 2023 | Docket: 68065370

Published

hearsay is reviewed de novo. Id. Under section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2022), "hearsay"

Elizabeth Sentz v. Bonefish Grill, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 15, 2023 | Docket: 68008456

Published

asserted”—that BFG had actual notice of the spill. § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2020). However, the server’s

MARIA MESA v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 2023 | Docket: 66917348

Published

witness has personal knowledge of the matter.”); § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2021) (“‘Hearsay’ is a statement

Marlin L. Joseph v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 10, 2022 | Docket: 62989167

Published

statements of identifications pursuant to section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2017), we conclude

JAMES DAMASK v. LESYA RYABCHENKO

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 27, 2021 | Docket: 60677205

Published

admitted over the father’s objection. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2020) (defining “hearsay” as

Terry Smith v. State of Florida & Terry Smith v. Mark S. Inch, etc.

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 21, 2021 | Docket: 60663528

Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication.” § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2010). Thus, trial counsel

WATERFALL VICTORIA GRANTOR TRUST II, SERIES G v. SARAH MCDONALD

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 25, 2021 | Docket: 60290990

Published

asserted and, thus, is hearsay as defined by section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2018). Hearsay is

R.L.G., A JUVENILE v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 16, 2021 | Docket: 59988813

Published

excluding out-of-court statements. Section 90.801(1)(c) defines hearsay as “a statement, other

STEVEN CANNON v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 14, 2021 | Docket: 59819919

Published

quotation marks, and brackets omitted). Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2019), defines “hearsay”

Dontae R. Morris v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 8, 2021 | Docket: 59804372

Published

could only be admissible to impeach Price. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2020) (defining hearsay); § 90.608

DYCK-O'NEAL, INC. v. RUDOLPH HERMAN

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 12, 2020 | Docket: 18620298

Published

13 Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2019), provides: “‘Hearsay’

MARQUIS VALENTINE v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 12, 2020 | Docket: 18620291

Published

State, 802 So. 2d 186, 197 (Fla. 1997)); see also § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2019). “[A] witness’s prior

JEROME THURSTON v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 28, 2020 | Docket: 18580217

Published

not fall within the definition of hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2018) (“‘Hearsay’ is a statement

MARQUIS VALENTINE v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 30, 2020 | Docket: 18488453

Published

State, 802 So. 2d 186, 197 (Fla. 1997)); see also § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2019). “[A] witness’s prior

Cynthia L. Jackson v. Household Finance Corporation III

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 2, 2020 | Docket: 17317801

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted,” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014). The Evidence Code defines

JOSHUA PERRAULT v. AMANDA ENGLE

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 2020 | Docket: 17070186

Published

her what happened. As such, it was hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (defining “statement,” for purposes

JOHN EDWARD BROWN v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 2020 | Docket: 17070189

Published

So. 2d 264, 265–66 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2018), defines hearsay

GARY TIMOTHY KITCHINGS v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 12, 2020 | Docket: 16834860

Published

charge of recent fabrication under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes After Kitchings

CHRISTOPHER A. STRACHAN v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 2, 2019 | Docket: 16280859

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2018). The defendant offered

Jimmy R. Baity v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 9, 2019 | Docket: 16037826

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2017). Pursuant to section

Akeen Kadoni Paul v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 22, 2019 | Docket: 15947712

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2016). “A statement by a person

Gonzalez v. State

275 So. 3d 766

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 2019 | Docket: 64719855

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2018). There is no question

Gonzalez v. State

275 So. 3d 766

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 2019 | Docket: 64719856

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2018). There is no question

DALVON DEON LAWRENCE v. STATE OF FLORIDA

274 So. 3d 1199

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 19, 2019 | Docket: 15798571

Published

prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2017). "Except as provided

JEFFREY A HELMS v. STATE OF FLORIDA

271 So. 3d 1030

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 15, 2019 | Docket: 15566690

Published

may be admissible as substantive evidence. See § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2017) (providing that a statement

Philip Morris USA v. Gloger

273 So. 3d 1046

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 20, 2019 | Docket: 14752819

Published

the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2018). While hearsay evidence

Troy Merck, Jr. v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 2018 | Docket: 14544779

Published

Rodriguez v. Stdie, 609 So. 2d 493, 500 (Fla. 1992)); § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. _23_ (2018). Thomas’s sworn

Troy Merck, Jr. v. State of Florida

260 So. 3d 184

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 2018 | Docket: 8498551

Published

609 So.2d 493 , 500 (Fla. 1992) ); § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018). Thomas's sworn statement

Noack v. State

260 So. 3d 1172

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 2018 | Docket: 64699959

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. "Hearsay within hearsay" is

Noack v. State

260 So. 3d 1172

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 2018 | Docket: 64699960

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. "Hearsay within hearsay" is

Marvin E. Noack v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 2018 | Docket: 8455095

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), 5 Fla

Cecil Shyron King v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 2018 | Docket: 14544799

Published

presented for the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (defining hearsay as “a statement

BRANDON HINCK v. STATE OF FLORIDA

260 So. 3d 325

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 5, 2018 | Docket: 8346799

Published

230 So. 3d 8, 11 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2017), defines “hearsay”

Joshua Roe v. State

254 So. 3d 612

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 2018 | Docket: 7784430

Published

Appellant actually physically abused his stepson. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2007) (“‘Hearsay’ is a statement

JAMES E. EVANS v. STATE OF FLORIDA

248 So. 3d 155

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 6, 2018 | Docket: 7061997

Published

have been admissible as non- hearsay under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statues, as the victim/declarant

ASAD U. KHAN v. STATE OF FLORIDA

243 So. 3d 506

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 2018 | Docket: 6356575

Published

the same make and model near the 7-Eleven. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2015); Keen v. State, 775 So

MARLENA KNIGHT, DEREK KNIGHT AND SARA PORTER v. G T E FEDERAL CREDIT UNION

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 14, 2018 | Docket: 6304682

Published

prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(c), Fla. Stat. (2016).

GLENROY ANDERSON v. STATE OF FLORIDA

230 So. 3d 175

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 1, 2017 | Docket: 6183883

Published

testimony the defense objected to is hearsay. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2015) (“ ‘Hearsay’ is a statement

Byrd v. State

221 So. 3d 659, 2017 WL 2569782, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 8668

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 14, 2017 | Docket: 60268327

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014). “ ‘A statement may,

Evans v. HSBC Bank, USA, National Association

223 So. 3d 1059, 2017 WL 1829484, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 6318

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 5, 2017 | Docket: 6058980

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90,801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014). Hearsay is inadmissible

Castillo v. State

217 So. 3d 1110, 2017 WL 1492938, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5748

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 2017 | Docket: 5784767

Published

possession of a stick during the attack. Under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2015), prior inconsistent

Johnny R. Williams v. State of Florida

215 So. 3d 656, 2017 WL 1325870, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 4956

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 2017 | Docket: 4670972

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013). Hearsay is generally

Livingston v. State

219 So. 3d 911, 2017 WL 1202398, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 4371

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 2017 | Docket: 4667149

Published

not an 'identification' under Florida Statute 90.801(2)(c)[,] . . . it was admissible as an

Alvarez-Mejia v. Bellissimo Properties, LLC

208 So. 3d 797, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 19273

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 2016 | Docket: 4559186

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted,” § 90.801(1), Fla. Stat. (2016), because not introduced

J.C.O. v. Department of Children & Families

199 So. 3d 429, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 12760

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 24, 2016 | Docket: 4415734

Published

testimony was inadmissible hearsay. See § 90.801(c), Fla. Stat. (2015) (“ ‘Hearsay' is a statement

Adams v. State

195 So. 3d 424, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 11412, 2016 WL 4016346

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 27, 2016 | Docket: 60255976

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014). Here, when the state

J.L., a Child v. State of Florida

193 So. 3d 1062, 2016 WL 3268345, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 9269

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 15, 2016 | Docket: 3078554

Published

excluded from the definition of hearsay under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes. The statements

Leonard v. State

192 So. 3d 1258, 2016 WL 3201073, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 8937

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 10, 2016 | Docket: 3077249

Published

agency. This is classic hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009) (“ ‘Hearsay* is a statement

Kaseta v. State

192 So. 3d 697, 2016 WL 3127523, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 8474

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 3, 2016 | Docket: 3069706

Published

fell under the basic definition of hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2010). Indeed, Martin's

Juan De Los Rios v. State of Florida

193 So. 3d 111, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 7959, 2016 WL 3002176

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 25, 2016 | Docket: 3071394

Published

50 So.3d 96, 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). Section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2012), defines' hearsay

Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Alaqua Property

190 So. 3d 662, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 6147, 2016 WL 1600421

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 22, 2016 | Docket: 3061473

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014). Thus, if the promissory

Richardson v. State

182 So. 3d 918, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 584, 2016 WL 166721

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 2016 | Docket: 60252840

Published

would have been objectionable as hearsay. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2012). Defense counsel argued below

A.J.M., a child v. State of Florida

182 So. 3d 895, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 437, 2016 WL 145816

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 13, 2016 | Docket: 3027778

Published

”- § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014). “A ‘declarant’ is a person who makes a statement.” § 90.801(l)(b)

Mootry v. Bethune-Cookman University, Inc.

186 So. 3d 15, 40 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1760, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 312, 2016 WL 81680

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2016 | Docket: 60253836

Published

because it contained numerous hearsay statements. Section 90.801, Florida Statutes (2013), defines “hearsay”

Freddie Lee McLawhorn, Jr. v. State of Florida

183 So. 3d 1166, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 221, 2016 WL 67357

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 6, 2016 | Docket: 3026053

Published

asserted are hearsay and generally inadmissible. § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2013). However, under section 90

Latrail Onrillious Jones v. State of Florida

189 So. 3d 853, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 17901, 40 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2638

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 25, 2015 | Docket: 3016004

Published

not admissible as substantive evidence under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), which provided

Trina Turner v. State of Florida

179 So. 3d 526, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 17896, 2015 WL 7566490

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 25, 2015 | Docket: 3015991

Published

the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90,801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2014) (emphasis added). “A

Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas v. Fernando Alexis Frias a/k/a Fernando A. Frias, a/k/a Fernandao A. Frias Brendy Frias Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 4, 2015 | Docket: 3009696

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2013). There are a number of exceptions

Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas v. Frias

178 So. 3d 505, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 16574, 2015 WL 6735332

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 4, 2015 | Docket: 60251480

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2013). There are a number of exceptions

David Davidian and Irma Davidian v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, National Association

178 So. 3d 45, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14930, 2015 WL 5827124

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 7, 2015 | Docket: 2865054

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1), Fla. Stat. (2015). The trial court properly

Rosario v. State

175 So. 3d 843, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 12848, 2015 WL 5051187

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 28, 2015 | Docket: 60250673

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013); see Fed. R.Evid. 801(c)

Richard Summerall v. State of Florida

171 So. 3d 150

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 2015 | Docket: 2673597

Published

Sum-merall’s calls constituted hearsay as defined in section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes. In Keen v. State,

Allen v. State

162 So. 3d 1055, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 5446, 2015 WL 1650438

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 2015 | Docket: 2649590

Published

So.2d 770, 773 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (quoting § 90.801(1)(e), Fla. Stat. (2006)). “The ‘de-clarant’ of

Howard v. State

152 So. 3d 825, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 20183, 2014 WL 7009714

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2014 | Docket: 2614428

Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication.” § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2013). However, “[t]here must

Kristy S. Holt v. Calchas, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 2014 | Docket: 2592847

Published

the affidavits should have been sustained. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013).4 The bank also argued

Margaret A. Allen v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 17, 2014 | Docket: 57174

Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2005). “Except as provided

Hartong v. Bernhart

128 So. 3d 858, 2013 WL 6331606, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 19439

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 6, 2013 | Docket: 60237178

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801( 1 )(c), Fla. Stat. (2013).

Constant v. State

120 So. 3d 122, 2013 WL 4081079, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 12649

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 14, 2013 | Docket: 60233892

Published

107 So.3d 527, 533 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (citing § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010)). While a declarant’s

Merrone v. State

116 So. 3d 589, 2013 WL 3197138, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 10078

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 26, 2013 | Docket: 60232401

Published

So.2d 14, 16 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). However, section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2011) provides: (2)

Golden v. State

114 So. 3d 404, 2013 WL 2320821, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8452

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 29, 2013 | Docket: 60231900

Published

State, 798 So.2d 870, 874 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)). Section 90.801(2)(c) deals with identification testimony.

Goldtrap v. State

115 So. 3d 1025, 2013 WL 2249290, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8260

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 23, 2013 | Docket: 60232052

Published

fabrication^]” § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2011). To be admissible under section 90.801(2)(b), “the [consistent]

Dixon v. State

107 So. 3d 527, 2013 WL 614130, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 2791

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 20, 2013 | Docket: 60228712

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010). The Supreme Court has

Crouse v. State

101 So. 3d 901, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20193, 2012 WL 5870070

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 21, 2012 | Docket: 60226445

Published

to cross-examination concerning the statement.” § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. In the present case, the victim

Velcofski v. State

96 So. 3d 1069, 2012 WL 3822157, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14852, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2131

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 5, 2012 | Docket: 60311413

Published

his driving privilege had been reinstated. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2009) (defining hearsay as

K.P. v. State

90 So. 3d 890, 2012 WL 2122162, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 9580

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 13, 2012 | Docket: 60309680

Published

68 So.3d 374, 375 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011); see also § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010) (defining hearsay). Defense

Prince v. State

80 So. 3d 1083, 2012 WL 516173, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 2403

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 17, 2012 | Docket: 2583149

Published

sole evidence of guilt and must comport with section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2007)."). As such

Adams v. State

80 So. 3d 426, 2012 WL 469816, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 2288

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 15, 2012 | Docket: 1263978

Published

admissible as a prior consistent statement. See § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2010) ("A statement is not

Hendricks v. State

59 So. 3d 368, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 6344, 2011 WL 1661413

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 4, 2011 | Docket: 60299704

Published

State, 727 So.2d 975 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)). Section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2010), defines hearsay

Rodriguez v. State

57 So. 3d 961, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 4324, 2011 WL 1135247

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 2011 | Docket: 60299215

Published

or motive, the trial court admitted it under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2009). The standard

Graham v. State

56 So. 3d 97, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 3161, 2011 WL 798519

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 2011 | Docket: 60298784

Published

State, 855 So.2d 1, 22-23 (Fla.2003)). Under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2008), prior statements

Marshall v. State

45 So. 3d 470, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 16270, 2010 WL 173642

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 27, 2010 | Docket: 2396300

Published

the truth of a life sentence for the defendant. § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2004). Even the majority does

Florida Elections Commission v. Valliere

45 So. 3d 506, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 13628, 2010 WL 3564726

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 15, 2010 | Docket: 2401657

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2008). Thus, according to appellees

Harris v. State

42 So. 3d 863, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 11751, 2010 WL 3168122

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 2010 | Docket: 1647417

Published

evidence as prior consistent statements under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes. Under that provision

R.K. v. Department of Children & Family Services

38 So. 3d 859, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 9130

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2010 | Docket: 60294837

Published

sworn or otherwise met the requirements of section 90.801(2)(a). And the requirements for the admission

S.D.T. v. State

33 So. 3d 779, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 5285

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 2010 | Docket: 60289958

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2008). For the purpose of a

J.B.J. v. State

17 So. 3d 312, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 7203

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 2009 | Docket: 60249087

Published

State responded that it was admissible under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes, as a prior consistent

Hughes v. State

8 So. 3d 1210, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 3824, 2009 WL 1139238

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 29, 2009 | Docket: 60305438

Published

hearsay, and there is no applicable exception. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2007); Love v. State, 971 So

Vazquez v. State

8 So. 3d 432, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2503, 34 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 828

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 25, 2009 | Docket: 60305477

Published

detective’s statement constitutes hearsay evidence. See § 90.801(1)(2), Fla. Stat. (2006). The statement was an

S.L. v. State

993 So. 2d 1108, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 15392

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 8, 2008 | Docket: 64856327

Published

hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition.” § 90.801(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006) (emphasis added). Interpreting

CAMERLENGO v. State

989 So. 2d 740, 2008 WL 4147117

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 10, 2008 | Docket: 1665572

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. "[I]f the statement is offered

T.J.N. v. State

977 So. 2d 770, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 4371

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2008 | Docket: 64854269

Published

declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006).2 The “de-clarant” of

Lugo v. State

971 So. 2d 183, 2007 WL 4545893

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 2007 | Docket: 1446304

Published

child's responses to the questions posed. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006). Rather, the child's

Pressley v. State

968 So. 2d 1039, 2007 WL 4206948

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 30, 2007 | Docket: 1745257

Published

as a prior consistent statement, pursuant to section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes, because the defense

Madry v. State

969 So. 2d 507, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 18443, 2007 WL 4106475

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 20, 2007 | Docket: 64853145

Published

of a person made after perceiving the person.” § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006). This definitional exception

Edwards v. State

967 So. 2d 308, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 15153, 2007 WL 2780574

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 26, 2007 | Docket: 64852762

Published

with Edwards. A statement is not hearsay under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statute (2002), if it is “[o]ne

Boyd v. State

963 So. 2d 884, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 13013, 2007 WL 2376675

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 22, 2007 | Docket: 64852031

Published

state*886ment of identification was inadmissible under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2004). In light of

Watts v. State

953 So. 2d 776, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 6118, 2007 WL 1202244

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 25, 2007 | Docket: 64850113

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006). Out-of-court statements

In the Interest of L.C. v. Department of Children & Family Services

947 So. 2d 1246, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 1056, 2007 WL 258145

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 31, 2007 | Docket: 64848796

Published

to substantiate J.C.’s violence, were hearsay. § 90.801(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). At trial, L.R. contended

In the Interest of L.C. v. Department of Children & Family Services

947 So. 2d 1240, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 1047

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 31, 2007 | Docket: 64848795

Published

the document was hearsay. § 90.801(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). Section 90.801(2)(a) provides an exception

Slicker v. State

941 So. 2d 1191, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 17931, 2006 WL 3040664

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 27, 2006 | Docket: 64847806

Published

their testimony would not have been hearsay. See § 90.801(l)(e), Fla. Stat. (2003) (defining hearsay as

Alvarez v. Crosby

907 So. 2d 1231, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 10808, 2005 WL 1631087

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 2005 | Docket: 64839745

Published

689 So.2d 1310 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); see also section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1997). See generally

E.P.W. v. State

902 So. 2d 336, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 8048, 2005 WL 1250244

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 27, 2005 | Docket: 64838426

Published

prior inconsistent statement is admitted under section 90.801(2)(a) or section 90.803(23). Id. at 760. McFarland

Briscoe v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc.

894 So. 2d 294, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 2061, 2005 WL 415939

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 23, 2005 | Docket: 64836184

Published

attorney, which is classic non-hearsay under section 90.801(l)(c), (2)(b), Florida Statutes (2002). Because

Mercer v. State

835 So. 2d 1273, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 1132, 2003 WL 244976

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 5, 2003 | Docket: 64820188

Published

prove the truth of the statements by the police. § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2000). Because the state’s

McCune v. State

842 So. 2d 864, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 293, 2003 WL 131637

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 17, 2003 | Docket: 64822159

Published

statement quoting her grandchild was hearsay. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (2000). However, whether the trial

Alvarez v. State

817 So. 2d 1037, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 7670, 2002 WL 1173861

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 2002 | Docket: 64815533

Published

689 So.2d 1310 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); see also section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1997). See generally

Puryear v. State

820 So. 2d 359, 2002 WL 663473

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 2002 | Docket: 787251

Published

901 (Fla. 2002), the supreme court held that section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (2000), did not authorize

State v. Dreggors

813 So. 2d 170, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 3310, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 615

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 15, 2002 | Docket: 64814120

Published

limitation on the general rule of impeachment. See § 90.801(2), Fla. Stat. (2001). If other witnesses testify

Isom v. State

809 So. 2d 67, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1284, 2002 WL 191607

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 2002 | Docket: 64813018

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. Here, Isom’s statement was not

A.E.B. v. State

818 So. 2d 534, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 231

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 16, 2002 | Docket: 64815693

Published

identification pursuant to section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2000). Section 90.801(2)(c) provides that

Miles v. State

799 So. 2d 367, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 16034, 2001 WL 1414740

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 14, 2001 | Docket: 64810021

Published

constitutes non-hearsay identification under section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1999). Puryear followed

Williams v. Henderson

779 So. 2d 450, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13279, 2000 WL 1514711

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 13, 2000 | Docket: 64804165

Published

victims, which makes those statements hearsay. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1997). Second, because the detective

Lemon v. State

767 So. 2d 620, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 11887, 2000 WL 1344836

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 20, 2000 | Docket: 64800510

Published

State, 483 So.2d 70 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), and section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1999). State v. Jones

Griffith v. State

762 So. 2d 1022, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 9037, 2000 WL 986370

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 19, 2000 | Docket: 64798842

Published

argued that the statement was admissible under § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1997), to rebut the implication that

J.J. v. State

757 So. 2d 1268, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 6222, 2000 WL 668969

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 24, 2000 | Docket: 64797304

Published

that the statement is not hearsay based on section 90.801(2)(a) which provides: (2) A statement is not

Young v. State

739 So. 2d 635, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9253, 1999 WL 493493

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 14, 1999 | Docket: 64790281

Published

i.e., that Mr. Young struck Mr. Sallins. See § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995). The second witness,

Lukaj v. State

729 So. 2d 965, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 2444, 1999 WL 110773

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 1999 | Docket: 64787408

Published

“business records” exception to the hearsay rule, section 90.801 et seq., Florida Statutes (1997). Appellant’s

Evans v. State

721 So. 2d 766, 1998 WL 796726

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 18, 1998 | Docket: 64784637

Published

identification of Evans inadmissible hearsay. See § 90.801(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1997); Hayes v. State, 581

Cephas v. State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services

719 So. 2d 7, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 10441, 1998 WL 483918

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 19, 1998 | Docket: 64783484

Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1995). McMillion’s telephone conversation

Smith v. State

710 So. 2d 1385, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7417, 1998 WL 314763

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 17, 1998 | Docket: 64781019

Published

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. § 90.801, Fla. Stat. (1997).

Brown v. State

707 So. 2d 849, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2155, 1998 WL 88183

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 1998 | Docket: 64779700

Published

turned himself in at the police station. Under section 90.801(l)(e), Florida Statutes (1995),1 hearsay is

Spatz v. Kirby

705 So. 2d 657, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 552, 1998 WL 23226

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 23, 1998 | Docket: 64778735

Published

fall within the definition of hearsay under section 90.801(1), Florida Statutes (1993). See King v. State

Cardali v. State

701 So. 2d 1241, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 13363, 1997 WL 741525

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 3, 1997 | Docket: 64777020

Published

improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication,” § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1995), and the prior consistent

Thomas v. State

697 So. 2d 926, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8500, 1997 WL 413801

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 25, 1997 | Docket: 64775293

Published

evidence of prior identification pursuant to section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1995). The state’s

Rodriguez v. State

696 So. 2d 533, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7761, 1997 WL 375042

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 9, 1997 | Docket: 64774756

Published

was apparently “pure” hearsay as defined by section 90.801(1), Florida Statutes (1995). See Anderson v

Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. M.B.

701 So. 2d 1155, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 295, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 719, 1997 WL 280066

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 29, 1997 | Docket: 64776994

Published

out-of-court statements and in-eourt testimony in' section 90.801, Florida *1161Statutes (1995), in defining

Davis v. State

694 So. 2d 113, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5832, 1997 WL 276283

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 28, 1997 | Docket: 64773871

Published

there was no such contention in this case. See § 90.801(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1995) (excluding from definition

Kearney v. State

689 So. 2d 1310, 1997 WL 136403

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 1997 | Docket: 1477135

Published

be reunited if Kearney were out of the way. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla.Stat. (1993). The main issue in this

Zimmerman v. Greate Bay Hotel & Casino, Inc.

683 So. 2d 1160, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 13134, 1996 WL 724122

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 1996 | Docket: 64769456

Published

inadmissible hearsay and does not fall within section 90.801(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1995). As stated by

Dollar v. State

685 So. 2d 901, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 12772, 1996 WL 695285

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 6, 1996 | Docket: 64770161

Published

Statutes, a newspaper is self-authenticating. Section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes, defines “hearsay”

Cunningham v. State

679 So. 2d 70, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 9454, 1996 WL 511554

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 11, 1996 | Docket: 64767120

Published

statement is a classic example of non-hearsay under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1995).1 Under the

Aneiro v. State

674 So. 2d 913, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5820, 1996 WL 293648

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 1996 | Docket: 64765082

Published

Judge, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. Section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1993) (Evidence Code)

Dietrich v. State

673 So. 2d 93, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4400, 1996 WL 210827

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 1, 1996 | Docket: 64764499

Published

classic examples of hearsay, as defined by section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1993). The state has

Hammond v. Mulligan

667 So. 2d 854, 1996 WL 16564

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 19, 1996 | Docket: 64762190

Published

State, 622 So.2d 1132 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). See also § 90.801(1)(c), Fla.Stat. (1993); Peterka v. State, 640

J.M. v. State

665 So. 2d 1135, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 65

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 5, 1996 | Docket: 64761212

Published

13(6)(a), 893.03(2)(a)4., Fla.Stat. (1993). . See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla.Stat. (1993). . The trial judge in

Edwards v. State

662 So. 2d 405, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11576, 1995 WL 642681

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 3, 1995 | Docket: 64759934

Published

made to the police were admissible pursuant to section 90.801(2)(b), notwithstanding the witnesses gave such

J.J.H. v. State

651 So. 2d 1239, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 2361

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 10, 1995 | Docket: 64755036

Published

statements made in an “other proceeding” under section 90.801(2)(a) and, therefore, such statements are not

Gaiter v. State

652 So. 2d 848, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 1948, 1995 WL 79877

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 1995 | Docket: 64755210

Published

applicable exception, such hearsay is inadmissible. § 90.801, Fla.Stat. (1993). However, in light of the overwhelming

Green v. State

667 So. 2d 789, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 28, 1995 WL 1525

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 4, 1995 | Docket: 64762178

Published

admissible as substantive evidence pursuant to Section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989). In my judgment

Parks v. State

644 So. 2d 106, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9296, 1994 WL 524295

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 28, 1994 | Docket: 64751583

Published

fabrication against the witness. Id. at 910; see also § 90.801(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (1991). However, the prior consistent

Young v. State

637 So. 2d 31, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4539, 1994 WL 180398

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 11, 1994 | Docket: 64748392

Published

or implied charge of recent fabrication. See § 90.-801(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (1991). The State maintains that

T.S. v. State

623 So. 2d 603, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 8772, 1993 WL 324026

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 27, 1993 | Docket: 64698456

Published

that the first two statements are hearsay. See § 90.801(1)(e), Fla. Stat. (1991). Even though Hill did

Hall v. State

622 So. 2d 1132, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 8412, 1993 WL 309016

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 13, 1993 | Docket: 64698252

Published

to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” Section 90.-801, Fla.Stat. (1991). Payne’s statement regarding

LeBlanc v. State

619 So. 2d 1021, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4139, 1993 WL 183410

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 1, 1993 | Docket: 64696918

Published

influence, motive, or recent fabrication.” Section 90.801(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (1991). It is urged that “the

Fields v. State

608 So. 2d 899, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11545, 1992 WL 324880

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 1992 | Docket: 64692173

Published

Detectives Johnston and Smith was not hearsay. Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes, defines “[h]earsay”

Daniels v. State

606 So. 2d 482, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 10694, 1992 WL 282065

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 16, 1992 | Docket: 64670688

Published

the category of hearsay as it is defined in section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes. This group includes

Holmon v. State

603 So. 2d 111, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8403, 1992 WL 184001

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 5, 1992 | Docket: 64669214

Published

deposition testimony, which met the requirements of section 90.801(2)(a) of the Florida Evidence Code, was admissible

Boykin v. State

601 So. 2d 1312, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 7348, 1992 WL 153965

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 8, 1992 | Docket: 64668799

Published

of photographs that included appellant’s. See § 90.801(1)(c), Fla.Stat. (1991). In effect, the officer

Young v. State

598 So. 2d 163, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4779, 1992 WL 84153

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 28, 1992 | Docket: 64667104

Published

Haynes v. State, 502 So.2d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1989). Moreover, it was enormously

Penner v. State

592 So. 2d 761, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 494, 1992 WL 5998

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 17, 1992 | Docket: 64664743

Published

report was inadmissible hearsay in violation of section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1987). This statute

Windham v. AmSouth Bank of Florida

581 So. 2d 630, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5637, 1991 WL 104636

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 1991 | Docket: 64659586

Published

which the latter had relied to her detriment. § 90.801, Fla.Stat. (1989). AmSouth’s counsel conceded

Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Sweet

579 So. 2d 244, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3825, 1991 WL 65961

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 30, 1991 | Docket: 64658603

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla.Stat. (1987). We find that the testimony

McCoy v. State

580 So. 2d 181, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2723, 1991 WL 77619

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 1991 | Docket: 64658973

Published

evidence, but only for impeachment purposes. Under section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), the prior inconsistent

Andalora v. Lindenberger

576 So. 2d 354, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1728, 1991 WL 27515

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 1991 | Docket: 64657310

Published

constituted impermissible use of hearsay evidence. § 90.801, Fla.Stat. (1981). As the question of the proper

Lazarowicz v. State

561 So. 2d 392, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3190

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 8, 1990 | Docket: 64650650

Published

she reported her father to the authorities. Section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1985), sets forth

Fletcher v. McEwen

561 So. 2d 616, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2973, 1990 WL 54984

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 2, 1990 | Docket: 64650739

Published

We reverse. The document was hearsay evidence. § 90.801(l)(a) and (c), Fla.Stat. (1985). The author of

Hutchinson v. State

559 So. 2d 340, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2219, 1990 WL 37491

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 4, 1990 | Docket: 64649504

Published

State, 498 So.2d 906 (Fla.1986). However, section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1987), contains an

Price v. State

553 So. 2d 728, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2846, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7044, 1989 WL 151438

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 13, 1989 | Docket: 64646942

Published

decide if the evidence was admissible under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1985). See, e.g.,

Ngai v. State

556 So. 2d 1130, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2764, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6684, 1989 WL 142665

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 28, 1989 | Docket: 64648124

Published

DCA), cert. denied, 354 So.2d 981 (Fla.1977); Section 90.801(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1985); Section 90

Alvin v. State

548 So. 2d 1112, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 457, 1989 Fla. LEXIS 864, 1989 WL 106354

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 1989 | Docket: 64644900

Published

testimony, it was admissible for this purpose. § 90.801(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (1985); Dufour v. State, 495

Wilkes v. State

541 So. 2d 664, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 619, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 1187, 1989 WL 20679

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 1989 | Docket: 64641581

Published

not constitute “other proceedings” as defined by § 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes2 and therefore such out

E.B. v. State

531 So. 2d 1053, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2310, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4511

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 1988 | Docket: 64637393

Published

offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” § 90.801(l)(c), Fla.Stat. (1987). Here, the purpose of

Gillis v. State

518 So. 2d 962, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 232, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 257, 1988 WL 4032

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 19, 1988 | Docket: 64632087

Published

proceeding, subject to the penalty of perjury. § 90.801(2)(a), Fla.Stat. (1985). A police questioning

Cowles v. State

517 So. 2d 771, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 152, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 49, 1988 WL 338

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 6, 1988 | Docket: 64631785

Published

first issue, we find that the requirements of section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1985), were met and

Williams v. State

510 So. 2d 656, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1853, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9609

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 31, 1987 | Docket: 64628668

Published

error as the testimony clearly was hearsay, see § 90.801(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (1985), not subject to any of

Nussdorf v. State

508 So. 2d 1273, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1393, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 8539

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 3, 1987 | Docket: 64628116

Published

victim’s prior consistent statement pursuant to section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1985). Appellant argues

Carroll v. State

497 So. 2d 253

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 27, 1987 | Docket: 1689847

Published

admissible as a prior consistent statement under section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1979). The trial court

Kirkland v. State

497 So. 2d 741, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2438, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11617

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 20, 1986 | Docket: 64623021

Published

an “other proceeding” within the meaning of Section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes. We do not believe

Wilkie v. State

498 So. 2d 1288, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2286, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10341

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 29, 1986 | Docket: 64623743

Published

Florida and the United States have created section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes and Federal Rule 801

Silveira-Hernandez v. State

495 So. 2d 914, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2167

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 14, 1986 | Docket: 1750891

Published

was a recent fabrication, § 90.801(2)(b), or to prove identification, § 90.801(2)(c).

Kirkland v. State

495 So. 2d 831, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2118, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9986

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 6, 1986 | Docket: 64622206

Published

purposes and as substantive evidence under Section 90.801(2)(a). The jury found appellant guilty as charged

Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Criminal Justice Standards & Training Commission v. Dukes

484 So. 2d 645, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 639, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6760

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 12, 1986 | Docket: 64617886

Published

investigator would not be admissible under section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (1983)2 were this not

Weinstein v. LPI-The Shoppes, Inc.

482 So. 2d 520, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6038, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 281

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 28, 1986 | Docket: 64617132

Published

process server’s testimony is not hearsay under section 90.-801(2){c), Florida Statutes (1983). We disagree

Arner v. State

459 So. 2d 1136, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2445, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16357

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 21, 1984 | Docket: 64608483

Published

consistent with the Federal Evidence Code, Section 90.801(2)(a), holds that such prior inconsistent statements

Hightower v. State

431 So. 2d 289, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19345

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 12, 1983 | Docket: 64596962

Published

version. No error was made in excluding this, Section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (1981); Whaley v. State

Hills v. State

428 So. 2d 318, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18841

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 17, 1983 | Docket: 64595734

Published

her grand jury testimony was hearsay under Section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1981), and does not

Foster's Auto Crushing v. Wood

427 So. 2d 1009, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21935

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 1982 | Docket: 64595516

Published

evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. § 90.801, Fla.Stat. (1981). Hearsay is inadmissible for

Henry v. State

383 So. 2d 320, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 16193

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 14, 1980 | Docket: 64576017

Published

been codified into the new evidence code. See § 90.801(2)(c), Fla.Stat. (1979). Appellant having failed