Bindinglaw

AL · rules

Ala. R. Evid. 805

Hearsay within hearsay

activein force · 2026-04-16 – presentact-effective-date

Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of the

combined statements conforms with an exception to the hearsay rule provided in these rules.

History

Advisory Committee’s Notes Instances arise in which an out-of-court statement by one declarant contains a statement made by yet another declarant. Such instances are variously termed “hearsay within hearsay,” “totem pole hearsay,” or “multiple hearsay.” A may take the stand, for example, to tell what B said C had said. The fact that one statement qualifies as coming within a hearsay exception does not necessarily ensure that the other statement so qualifies. Rule 805 sets out the analysis that is to be applied to whether such multiple hearsay is admissible. Each declarant’s statement, considered individually, must satisfy the hearsay concern by either qualifying under a hearsay exception or being, by definition, nonhearsay. Suppose, for example, that the declarant, in an offered statement made under belief of impending death, states what another person was heard to say at the scene of a crime. The declarant’s statement may be admissible under the exception specifically created for such statements under belief of impending death. See Ala.R.Evid. 804(b)(2). However, that portion that reveals the statement of another must, in its own right, be admissible over a hearsay objection; the admissibility could come, for example, under the declaration against interest exception if the declarant is unavailable. See Ala.R.Evid. 804(b)(3). Alternatively, and by way of illustration, the second declarant’s statement could qualify as an excited utterance. See Ala.R.Evid. 803(2). The multiple hearsay analysis set forth in this rule is consistent with preexisting Alabama authority. This analysis has been applied to business records containing both double and even triple hearsay. See Reeves v. King, 534 So.2d 1107 (Ala.1988). See also C. Gamble, McElroy’s Alabama Evidence § 254.01(2) (4th ed. 1991). Rule 805 is identical to its federal counterpart.

Provenance

Source
judicial.alabama.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-15
Edition
2026-09-15
Content hash
e0e020f91187a7cda8d4dce64775c8ddfa5c09bbcbf66b3be1359de9d3717bf8
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.
Ala. R. Evid. 805 — Hearsay within hearsay · binding.law