Also known as:extra-judicial statement · extrajudicial statement · extrajudicial statements · out-of-court statements
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
1
An out-of-court statement offered in a criminal prosecution. The Confrontation Clause bars its admission against the defendant unless the declarant is unavailable and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant.
2
Sense 1
1
Sense 1
An out-of-court statement offered in a criminal prosecution. The Confrontation Clause bars its admission against the defendant unless the declarant is unavailable and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant.
Sources & Authorities· 1 primary source
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Examples
Sense 2
2
Sense 2
A statement made to the public by a lawyer who is or has been involved in a matter. Model rules prohibit any such statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will be disseminated and will create a substantial likelihood of material prejudice to an adjudicative proceeding.
Sources & Authorities· 2 primary sources
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A statement made to the public by a lawyer who is or has been involved in a matter. Model rules prohibit any such statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will be disseminated and will create a substantial likelihood of material prejudice to an adjudicative proceeding.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
4
Police Interview After Incident
After a domestic dispute, Amy signed an affidavit accusing her husband of battery. At trial the prosecution offered the affidavit to prove the assault occurred. The court excluded it because the defendant had no prior opportunity to cross-examine Amy.
Co-Defendant Statement Withheld
Before trial Brady's lawyer requested Boblit's statements to police. The prosecution turned over several but withheld one in which Boblit admitted the actual killing. The Supreme Court held the suppression violated due process.
Brady v. Maryland373 U.S. 83 (1963)
Ongoing Emergency 911 Call
During an assault in progress the victim told a 911 dispatcher that her husband was attacking her with a knife. The prosecution offered the recording at trial. The court admitted the statements because they were made to resolve an ongoing emergency rather than to create testimony.
Davis v. Washington547 U.S. 813 (2006)
Post-Arrest Statement to Police
After arrest Toy told officers that Yee had sold him narcotics. The prosecution offered Toy's statement against Yee at trial. The court excluded it because the statement was the product of an illegal arrest and therefore inadmissible against the co-defendant.
Wong Sun v. United States371 U.S. 471 (1963)
Frequently Asked1
When does an out-of-court statement become testimonial for Confrontation Clause purposes?+
A statement is testimonial when its primary purpose is to establish or prove past events relevant to later criminal prosecution rather than to meet an ongoing emergency. Courts examine the circumstances of the interrogation, including whether an emergency existed, the declarant's purpose, and the formality of the exchange.
Supporting sources
Model Codes
Examples2
Press Conference on Public Filings
City attorney Reyes held a press conference and distributed copies of internal affairs reports already filed as court exhibits. She read and paraphrased only those materials. The disciplinary board found no violation because the statements stayed within the public-record exception.
Vague Safe-Harbor Statement
Defense counsel told reporters the case involved only routine self-defense and added no further details. The state bar charged a violation under the trial-publicity rule. The court dismissed the charge because the rule's vague safe-harbor language failed to give fair notice.
Frequently Asked2
May a lawyer repeat information already filed in court without violating the trial-publicity rule?+
Yes. The rule expressly permits lawyers to state information contained in a public record even when the statement might otherwise risk prejudice. Materials attached to motions filed with the court qualify as public records.
Supporting sources
Does the First Amendment protect a lawyer's extrajudicial statements to the press?+
The First Amendment constrains attorney-discipline rules but permits regulation of statements that create a substantial likelihood of material prejudice to an adjudicative proceeding. Vague safe-harbor language in a rule can render its application unconstitutional.
Supporting sources
541 U.S. 36 (2004)Evidence
…or similar pretrial statements that declarants would reasonably expect to be used prosecutorially," Brief for Petitioner 23; "extrajudicial statements . . . contained in formalized testimonial materials, such as affidavits, depositions, prior testimony, or confessions," White v. Illinois , 502 U. S. 346, 365 (1992) (Thomas, J., joined by…