Also known as: statements not offered for truth of the matter asserted · not offered for truth · non-hearsay · not hearsay
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Out-of-court statements introduced to show their effect on the listener or another non-truth purpose rather than to establish the facts they describe.
Antonio Alvarado sued his employer after an injury on the job site. He testified that a supervisor had warned the crew about unstable scaffolding the day before the accident. The statement was offered only to prove that Alvarado had received notice of the risk, not to prove the scaffolding was actually unstable.
Aaron Adams testified at trial that he saw the defendant at the scene. Defense counsel offered Adams's earlier statement to police that he had not been present. The prior statement was introduced solely to show Adams had a motive to fabricate after speaking with the prosecutor, not to prove where Adams had been.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Adrian Aguilar was charged with conspiracy to distribute drugs. The government offered a recorded call in which a co-conspirator mentioned Aguilar's name. The call was admitted only to show the existence of the conspiracy and Aguilar's connection to the group, not to prove the truth of any specific assertion in the call.
Alan Ackerman was tried for sexual assault. An expert witness described DNA testing performed by a non-testifying analyst. The report was introduced only to explain the basis for the expert's own opinion on the DNA match, not to prove the truth of the analyst's findings.
Andrew Avery was prosecuted for possession of stolen property. An accomplice's out-of-court statement describing the theft was offered only to show that Avery knew the goods were stolen, not to prove the theft itself occurred.
Adam Anderson sued for false arrest after officers detained him based on a tip. The tipster's statement describing Anderson as armed was admitted solely to show why the officers acted as they did, not to prove Anderson actually possessed a weapon.
A statement falls outside the hearsay definition when it is introduced to prove something other than the facts it asserts, such as the effect on the listener or notice to a party.
Supporting sources
No. A statement may have multiple purposes, but it qualifies as non-hearsay if at least one purpose is something other than proving the truth of the matter asserted.
Supporting sources
When offered only to show the witness's account was consistent before any motive to fabricate arose, the statement is not hearsay because it is not offered to prove the facts asserted.
Supporting sources
Yes. Statements offered to prove a party received notice or warning are not offered for the truth of their contents and therefore fall outside the hearsay rule.
Supporting sources
…Majority opinion Opinion of Chief Justice Rehnquist Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E) provides: "A statement is not hearsay if . . . [t]he statement is offered against a party and is . . . a statement by a coconspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy." We granted certiorari to…