What is the test for making a spontaneous declaration in a civil case?

First, Salazar contends that his statement that he had been chased by gang members with guns was admissible under the spontaneous declaration exception. Evidence of a statement is not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule if the statement "(a) Purports to narrate, describe, or explain an act, condition, or event perceived by the declarant; and [] (b) Was made spontaneously while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by such perception." (Evid. Code, 1240.) In order to find the exception applicable, " '(1) there must be some occurrence startling enough to produce this nervous excitement and render the utterance spontaneous and unreflecting; (2) the utterance must have been before there has been time to contrive and misrepresent, i.e., while the nervous excitement may be supposed still to dominate and the reflective powers to be yet in abeyance; and (3) the utterance must relate to the circumstance of the occurrence preceding it.' " (People v. Poggi (1988) 45 Cal.3d 306, 318, quoting Showalter v. Western Pacific R. R. Co. (1940) 16 Cal.2d 460, 468.) This exception is based on the notion that this type of statement, although not necessarily more reliable or accurate, is more likely to represent " 'the unreflecting and sincere expression of one's actual impressions and belief.' " (Showalter v. Western Pacific R. R. Co., supra, at p. 468.) "[T]he mental state of the declarantthat is, the question of whether he or she was sufficiently under stress so as to dramatically reduce the possibility of deliberation and

Page 13

prevaricationis crucial to determining whether the exception applies." (People v. Lucas (2014) 60 Cal.4th 153, 269-270 (Lucas).)