RULE 806. ATTACKING AND SUPPORTING
THE DECLARANT'S CREDIBILITY
If a hearsay statement, or a statement defined in Rule 801(d)(2)(iii), (iv), or (v), is
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.
When a hearsay statement, or a statement described in Rule 801(d)(2)(C), (D), or (E), has been admitted in evidence, the declarant's credibility may be attacked, and then supported, by any evidence that would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness. The court may admit evidence of the declarant's inconsistent statement or conduct, regardless of when it occurred or whether the declarant had an opportunity to explain or deny it. If the party against whom the statement was admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party may examine the declarant on the statement as if on cross-examination.
Rule 806 was amended, effective March 1, 1990; ____________________.
Rule 806 treats a declarant of hearsay evidence as any other witness by allowing the
declarant's credibility to be attacked in accordance with the rules
of Article VI.
deviation is required, however, and that is a declarant need not have been given an
opportunity to deny or explain a statement inconsistent with the hearsay statement.
Rule 613(b), NDREv. This is because the inconsistent statement may well have been
subsequent to the hearsay statement offered in evidence, precluding bringing it to the
Rule 806 was amended, effective March 1, 1990. The amendments are technical in nature and no substantive change is intended.
Rule 806 was amended, effective ______________, in response to the December 1, 2011, revision of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.
Sources: Joint Procedure Committee Minutes
: of September 27, 2012,
page 26; March 24-25, 1988, page 12; December 3, 1987, page 15; April 8, 1976, page 13;
October 1, 1975,
page 8. Rule 806, Federal Rules of Evidence Fed.R.Ev. 806; Rule
806, SBAND proposal.
Cross Reference: N.D.R.Ev. 607 (Who May Impeach a Witness), N.D.R.Ev. 608 (A Witness's Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness), N.D.R.Ev. 609 (Impeachment by Evidence of a Criminal Conviction), N.D.R.Ev. 613 (Witness's Prior Statement).