What aspect of a declarant's statement makes it more likely to be viewed as non-testimonial?

A statement made during an emergency is more likely to be considered non-testimonial because it is often spontaneous and aimed at addressing an immediate crisis rather than providing information for potential prosecution. Courts have recognized that statements made in the heat of the moment, particularly in emergency situations, are typically not produced with the intent of eventually being used in a judicial proceeding.

The nature of such statements reflects an urgent need to communicate vital information to respond to a pressing situation, rather than a structured or reflective communication meant for later use in court. This aligns with the understanding of non-testimonial statements, as they are seen as lacking the formal features associated with testimonial declarations, which are prepared with the expectation of legal scrutiny.

By contrast, detailed descriptions of events or statements made in written form usually indicate a greater likelihood of being viewed as testimonial, as they are often crafted with the consideration of their potential use in a legal context. Similarly, statements made in the presence of police or during a structured inquiry also tend to be classified as testimonial because they are likely produced with the purpose of being evidence.