with her fist because he would not go to bed. While the exact time of the battery could not be established, D.J.'s physical and psychological states suggest that he was not capable of thoughtful reflection and deliberation. Davenport, 749 N.E.2d at 1149. Moreover, it is reasonable to infer that when D.J. talked to Officer Wilson, he was still upset because of the stress of the startling event. The evidence further demonstrates that the startling event that caused D.J. visible distress was the physical altercation with Jones that he described to Officer Wilson. Gordon, 743 N.E.2d at 378. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting D.J.'s statements to Officer Wilson under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. See e.g., Jenkins, 725 N.E.2d at 68. (<HOLDING>). B. Jones also argues that D.J.'s statements
holding trial court did not abuse its discretion by ruling based only on affidavits holding the courts ruling to admit or exclude evidence will only be reversed if it constituted an abuse of discretion amounting to an error of law holding that the determination of whether statements are excited utterances is within the trial courts discretion and its ruling will be reversed only for an abuse of that discretion holding that a trial courts order in a probationrevocation proceeding will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion holding that rulings on admissibility of evidence are within the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent a showing of abuse of that discretion