Can a party introduce in evidence an out-of-court statement by a declarant who is unavailable as a witness at trial?

"Under one of the statutory exceptions to the hearsay rule, a party may introduce in evidence, for the truth of the matter stated, an out-of-court statement by a declarant who is unavailable as a witness at trial if the statement, when made, was against the declarant's penal, pecuniary, proprietary, or social interest. A party who maintains that an out-of-court statement is admissible under this exception as a declaration against penal interest must show that the declarant is unavailable, that the declaration was against the declarant's penal interest, and that the declaration was sufficiently reliable to warrant admission despite its hearsay character. [Citation.] To determine whether the declaration passes the required threshold of trustworthiness, a trial court `may take into account not just the words but the circumstances under which they were uttered, the possible motivation of the declarant, and the declarant's relationship to the defendant.' [Citation.] On appeal, the trial court's determination on this issue is reviewed for abuse of discretion. [Citation.]" (People v. Cudjo (1993) 6 Cal.4th 585, 606-607, italics in original, fn. omitted.) "The trustworthiness of a statement against penal interest lies in the assumption that the declaration is so contrary to the declarant's penal interest that the statement would not be made by a reasonable person unless true. [Citation.]" (People v. Hayes (1999) 21 Cal.4th 1211, 1257, fn. 8.)