Federal Rule of Evidence 803(2) or a comparable State rule creates a hearsay exception for an utterance that relates to a startling event or condition and is made while the declarant -- the maker of the statement -- is excited as a result of the starling event or condition.

Cf. United States v. Bedonie, 913 F.2d 782, 789-781 (10th Cir. 1990) ("Fed.R.Evid. 601 provides that '[e]very person is competent to be a witness except as otherwise provided.' 'A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that...It is possible that persons may be disqualified from serving as witnesses on grounds not expressly enumerated in codes of evidence or by general common law principles -- on unenumerated grounds such as age, illness, sensory defects, defects in intelligence, lack of understanding, inability to communicate, defects in memory, and inability to be truthful.

Fed. R. Evid. 602 ("Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the witness' own testimony.").Evidence that a witness has the personal knowledge that is required of a witness may be provided by the witness whose testimony is offered but evidence of the witness's personal knowledge may also be provided by other witnesses or by other evidence.

Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 557 F.2d 349, 356 (2d Cir. 1977) (holding that the Federal Power Commission's properly relied on the historical data and ancient documents because (1) "such reference is commonly made in....There is a hearsay exception for public records of documents affecting an interest in property.