State v. Lewis

Supreme Court of Tennessee · 2007 · Evidence

235 S.W.3d 136 (Tenn. 2007)

Updated August 22, 2026

EvidenceHearsayConfrontation ClauseDying declarationsExpert testimonyDNA evidenceTenn. R. Evid. 803(1.2)party opponent admission

Facts

After the victim was shot during an attempted robbery at his antiques store, he told responding witnesses and Detective Chastain that a black male had shot him and said the information of 'the lady with the vases' was on the desk; when asked if that lady was connected, he replied, 'I know she is.' Police found a note with Sabrina Lewis's name and vase information, and the defendant later gave a videotaped statement admitting she had been at the store that morning and sold two vases to the victim, while denying involvement in the crimes. At trial, the State also presented mitochondrial DNA testimony from Dr. Terry Melton, who testified from data generated in her lab by Dr. Kimberly Nelson and stated that the hair from a hat left at the scene could not exclude the defendant's sons as contributors. The defendant challenged admission of her videotaped statement, the victim's statement identifying her involvement, and Dr. Melton's DNA testimony.

Issue

Whether the trial court erred in admitting: (1) the defendant's videotaped statement as an admission by a party opponent although it was not against her interest when made; (2) the victim's statement implicating 'the lady with the vases' as a dying declaration consistent with confrontation rights; and (3) expert DNA testimony from an expert who did not personally perform the bench testing.

Rule

Under Tennessee Rule of Evidence 803(1.2), a party's own out-of-court statement offered against that party is admissible without any requirement that it have been against the party's interest when made. A dying declaration in a homicide prosecution is admissible under Rule 804(b)(2) when the declarant is dead, the prosecution is for the declarant's homicide, the declarant was the victim, the statement concerns the cause or circumstances of death, and the declarant believed death was imminent; this exception survives Crawford even when the statement is testimonial. Under Rule 703, an expert may base an opinion on otherwise inadmissible facts or data reasonably relied on in the field unless the underlying data indicate a lack of trustworthiness, and confrontation rights are not violated when the testifying expert gives an independent evaluation of data not itself admitted for its truth.

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In a robbery prosecution in Memphis, Dana Cole gave detectives a recorded statement saying she had visited the jewelry kiosk earlier that day to return a bracelet, but denied knowing anything about the later theft. At trial, the prosecutor offers the recording against Dana to show she placed herself at the scene shortly before the crime.

Dana objects that her statement was inadmissible hearsay because it was self-serving when she made it and was not against her interest. How should the court rule?

Explanation. Under the majority rule, a statement offered against a party that is the party's own statement is admissible under the party-opponent provision without any requirement that it have been against the declarant's interest when made. The doctrine rejects the mistaken label 'admission against interest' for this rule. Because the prosecution is offering Dana's own statement against her, it is admissible absent some other exclusionary rule.