decided before the United States Supreme Court reinterpreted the Confron tation Clause in Crawford v. Washington. Would Crawford and its progeny change the result in either case? 3.36. Pauline sues Devon for damages caused when their cars collided. Devon's wife, Wilma, was a passenger in Devon's car at the time of the acci- dent. Pauline seeks to testify that, immediately following the accident, Wilma told her in state of great agitation that Devon had "been sleeping terribly all week long." Does the hearsay rule prohibit this testimony? 3.37. Dumbarton is charged with murdering Vasquez. The prosecution steks to have a witness testify that she spoke with Vasquez by telephone on the night he died, and that he ended the conversation by saying, "Oh, there's the door. It must be Dumbarton. Talk to you later." The defense objects on grounds of hearsay and confrontation. How should the judge rule? 4. State of Mind sri me beauind [F.R.E. 803(3); C.E.C. $$1250-1252, 1260] a. Generally When an out-of-court statement is used as circumstantial proof of the declar- ant's state of mind, the hearsay rule is not implicated, because the statement is