§ 90.801, Fla. Stat. — Hearsay; Definitions; Exceptions
Plain English
Hearsay is the rule everyone has heard of and almost nobody defines cleanly. Here it is: hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of what it asserts. The classic example — a witness saying “my neighbor told me the light was red” to prove the light was red. It has three moving parts: a declarant (who made the statement), a statement (an oral or written assertion, or assertive conduct), and the key trigger — it’s offered for its truth. If the same words are offered for another reason (to show notice, effect on the listener, or simply that they were said), it isn’t hearsay at all. Florida also labels certain prior statements as not hearsay when the declarant testifies and is cross-examined: a prior inconsistent statement given under oath, a prior consistent statement offered to rebut a charge of recent fabrication, and a statement of identification.
From the Courtroom
Half of all hearsay objections are won not on an exception but on three words: not for truth. The skilled examiner reframes on the spot — “I’m not proving the light was red, Your Honor; I’m proving my client heard a warning and reacted to it.” Same sentence, completely different evidentiary life.
Key Points & Authority
- § 90.801(1), Fla. Stat. — Defines declarant, statement, and hearsay (an out-of-court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted).
- § 90.801(2): certain prior statements by a testifying, cross-examined declarant are not hearsay — sworn prior inconsistent statements, prior consistent statements rebutting recent-fabrication charges, and statements of identification.
- Federal parallel: Fed. R. Evid. 801 — same core definition; the federal rule also classifies opposing-party statements as non-hearsay (Florida handles party admissions through § 90.803(18)).
Federal Parallel
The federal counterpart is Fed. R. Evid. 801. The definitions track closely; one structural difference is that the federal rule treats opposing-party statements as “not hearsay” within 801(d)(2), while Florida reaches party admissions through a hearsay exception in § 90.803(18).
About this rule walkthrough
Part of The Evidence Code, hosted by John M. Phillips — Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer, Court TV analyst, admitted in 8 states + 9 federal districts + SCOTUS.
Free consultation: (904) 444-4444 · About John Phillips
Educational only — not legal advice.
Rule Text (verbatim from the Florida Supreme Court)
(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. (c) A “statement” is: 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 (c) One of identification of a person made after perceiving the person.
Educational reference. Educational only — not legal advice.
What this rule means in plain English
Section 90.801 defines hearsay as an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, and lists prior statements by a testifying, cross-examined declarant that are not hearsay (sworn prior inconsistent statements, certain prior consistent statements, and statements of identification).