Editing Res gestae (section)

==''Res gestae'' in American hearsay law==
{{Moresources|section|date=December 2022}}
Under the [[Federal Rules of Evidence]], ''res gestae'' may formerly have been, but is no longer, an exception to the rule against [[hearsay]] evidence based on the belief that, because certain statements are made naturally, spontaneously, and without deliberation during the course of an event, they leave little room for misunderstanding or misinterpretation upon hearing by someone else (e.g., by the witness, who will later repeat the statement to the court), and thus the courts believe that such statements carry a high degree of credibility. Statements that could be admitted into evidence as ''res gestae'' fall into three headings:

# Words or phrases that either form part of, or explain, a physical act;
# Exclamations that are so spontaneous as to belie concoction; and
# Statements that are evidence of someone's state of mind.

The present sense impression, excited utterance, and then-existing mental, emotional, or physical condition hearsay exceptions, respective to the above headings, now cover many situations under the Federal Rules of Evidence that would formerly have been considered ''res gestae''.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_803|title = Rule 803. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay}}</ref>

In some jurisdictions, the ''res gestae'' exception has also been used to admit police sketches.<ref>Commonwealth v. Dugan, 381 A.2d 967 (Pa. Super. 1977)</ref>

The following scenario is an example of types 1 and 2: Imagine a young woman (the witness) standing on the side of a main road. She sees some commotion across the street. On the opposite side of the road to her, she sees an old man and hears him shout, "The bank is being robbed!", as a young man runs out of a building and away down the street. The old man is never found (and so cannot appear in court to repeat what he said), but the woman repeats what she heard him say. Such a statement would be considered trustworthy for the purpose of admission as evidence because the statement was made concurrently with the event, and there is little chance that the witness repeating the hearsay could have misunderstood its meaning or the speaker's intentions.