CT · rules
Conn. Code Evid. § 8-8
Impeaching and Supporting Credibility of Declarant
When hearsay has been admitted in evidence,
the credibility of the declarant may be impeached,
and if impeached may be supported, by any evi -
dence that would be admissible for those pur -
poses if the declarant had testified as a witness.
Evidence of a statement of the declarant made
at any time, inconsistent with the declarant’s hearsay statement, need not be shown to or the contents of the statement disclosed to the declarant.
History
COMMENTARY The weight a fact finder gives a witness’ in-court testimony often depends on the witness’ credibility. So too can a declar- ant’s credibility affect the weight accorded that declarant’s hearsay statement admitted at trial. Consequently, Section 8-8 permits the credibility of a declarant, whose hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, to be attacked or supported as if the declarant had taken the stand and testified. See State v. Calabrese, 279 Conn. 393, 409–10, 902 A.2d 1044 (2006) (evidence tending to show bias, prejudice or interest); State v. Mills, 80 Conn. App. 662, 667–68, 837 A.2d 808 (2003) (evidence of prior criminal convictions), cert. denied, 268 Conn. 914, 847 A.2d 311 (2004); cf. State v. Torres, 210 Conn. 631, 640, 556 A.2d 1013 (1989); State v. Onofrio, 179 Conn. 23, 35, 425 A.2d 560 (1979); State v. Segar, 96 Conn. 428, 440–43, 114 A. 389 (1921). Treating the hearsay declarant the same as an in-court witness would seem to pose a problem when impeachment by inconsistent statements is employed. Section 6-10 (b) provides that when examining a witness about a prior inconsistent state- ment, ‘‘the statement should be shown. . . or [its] contents . . . disclosed to the witness at that time.’’ Showing or disclos- ing the contents of the inconsistent statement to the declarant will usually be impossible or impracticable because the declar- ant may not be a witness at trial, or may not be on the witness stand at the time the hearsay statement is offered. The second sentence in Section 8-8 relieves the examiner from complying with Section 6-10 (b). By using the terminology ‘‘[e]vidence of a statement. . . made at any time’’; (emphasis added); Section 8-8 recognizes the possibility that impeachment of a hearsay declarant may involve the use of a subsequent inconsistent statement, i.e., an inconsistent statement made after the hearsay declaration statement to be impeached. See generally State v. Torres, supra, 210 Conn. 635–40 (statements made subsequent to and inconsistent with probable cause hearing testimony, which was admitted at trial, were used to impeach hearsay declarant).
Provenance
- Source
- jud.ct.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-15
- Content hash
b5d98bc2e75f1e504e02d6f63ab01ade5bf9dba1551d7e6821ebc8783a891458
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.