§ Rule 806. Attacking and supporting credibility of declarant

Codes > Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes > Rules of > Article VIII > Rule 806.

Rule 806. Attacking and supporting credibility of declarant

When a hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked, and if attacked may be supported, by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if declarant had testified as a witness. Evidence of a statement or conduct by the declarant at any time, inconsistent with the declarant's hearsay statement, is not subject to any requirement that the declarant may have been afforded an opportunity to deny or explain. If the party against whom a hearsay statement has been admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party is entitled to examine the declarant on the statement as if under cross-examination.

Comment: Pa.R.E. 806 is similar to F.R.E. 806, except that Pa.R.E. 806 makes no reference to Rule 801(d)(2). The subject matter of F.R.E. 801(d)(2) (admissions) is covered by Pa.R.E. 803(25). The change is not substantive.Pa.R.E. 806 is consistent with Pennsylvania law. See Commonwealth v. Davis, 363 Pa. Super. 562, 526 A.2d 1205 (1987), appeal denied 518 Pa. 624, 541 A.2d 1135 (1988).

The requirement that a witness be given an opportunity to explain or deny the making of an inconsistent statement provided by Pa.R.E. 613(b) is not applicable when the prior inconsistent statement is offered to impeach a statement admitted under an exception to the hearsay rule. In most cases, the declarant will not be on the stand at the time when the hearsay statement is offered and for that reason the requirement of Pa.R.E. 613(b) is not appropriate.

The last sentence of Pa.R.E. 806 allows the party against whom a hearsay statement has been admitted to call the declarant as a witness and cross-examine the declarant about the statement. This is consistent with Pennsylvania law. See Commonwealth v. Haber, 351 Pa. Super. 79, 505 A.2d 273 (1986).