Defendant is on trial for robbing a bank in State A. She testified that she was in State B at the time of the robbery. Defendant calls her friend, Witness, to testify that two days before the robbery Defendant told him that she was going to spend the next three days in State B. Witness's testimony is 
admissible, because the statement falls within the present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule.  admissible, because a statement of plans falls within the hearsay exception for then-existing state of mind.  inadmissible, because it is offered to establish an alibi by Defendant's own statement.  inadmissible, because it is hearsay not within any exception. 
Question: Defendant is on trial for robbing a bank in State A. She testified that she was in State B at the time of the robbery. Defendant calls her friend, Witness, to testify that two days before the robbery Defendant told him that she was going to spend the next three days in State B. Witness's testimony is 
A. admissible, because the statement falls within the present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule. 
B. admissible, because a statement of plans falls within the hearsay exception for then-existing state of mind. 
C. inadmissible, because it is offered to establish an alibi by Defendant's own statement. 
D. inadmissible, because it is hearsay not within any exception. 
Answer: