In New York, the current sense perception exception requires corroborative evidence. Which statement best describes that requirement?

• A. Corroboration is never required
• B. Corroboration is required in New York when using this exception
• C. Corroboration is required to convict when relying on the declaration
• D. Corroboration is required only for civil cases

Answer: (B)

The present sense impression rule lets a statement describing an event as it’s happening (or immediately after) be admitted as evidence even though it’s hearsay. In New York, you can’t rely on that statement alone to establish the truth of the matter when you use this exception—you need independent corroborating evidence. That is why the best description is that corroboration is required in New York when using this exception. This guards against relying solely on the declarant’s impression, which might be mistaken or misinterpreted. The other choices would wrongly say corroboration isn’t needed, or that it’s limited to civil cases, or that it’s only about convicting, which isn’t the general rule described here.