Evidence Rule 803(8) and the Admissibility of Police Reports

Suppose that a law enforcement officer testifies for the State in a criminal case and is unable to remember some aspects of his investigation. The prosecutor shows the officer his report, which the officer prepared in the ordinary course of his work around the time of the events, but it does not refresh his memory. The prosecutor offers the report as evidence. The defendant’s attorney objects, relying on North Carolina Rule of Evidence 803(8). That rule creates an exception to the hearsay rule for official records and reports, but it specifically excludes “in criminal cases matters observed by police officers and other law-enforcement personnel.” The prosecutor argues that notwithstanding this prohibition, the report is admissible under other hearsay exceptions. Who’s right? This post discusses cases addressing the relationship between the “police report exclusion” in Rule 803(8) and other rules of evidence. Few North Carolina cases have closely analyzed the issue, but the federal rules of evidence and many other states’ evidence rules contain a similar exclusion. Together, cases here and elsewhere provide a guide, although not a definitive answer, to this question. Does Rule 803(8) trump other hearsay exceptions? An early decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that the exclusion of police reports under Rule 803(8) controls the admissibility of such reports under other hearsay exceptions. In United States v. Oates, 560 F.2d 45 (2d Cir. 1977), the government offered a government chemist’s report finding that the white powdery substance seized from the defendant was heroin. The defendant [...]