Relevance and Prejudicial Evidence: 401, 402, 403 Flashcards
What does Rule 401 say? What is its purpose?
R. 401 Test for Relevant Evidence Evidence is relevant if:
(a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and
(b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.
Divides relevance into two tests
What are the two definitive tests under Rule 401?
1) Probative of
+ Evidence is probative if it makes such a fact more or less likely
+ Means there’s a relationship between evidence and the fact → “chain of inferences” can be constructed connecting the evidence to the case
+ Even if the evidence helps just a little, it’s relevant
2) A fact of consequence in determining the action
+ Formerly known as material fact
+ A fact helpful to resolving the suit, “properly provable” in the case
+ Element of the cause of action, claim, or defense
Ex: Credibility of witness, Background facts
True or false: Relevancy is an inherent characteristic of a piece of evidence
FALSE. Relevancy depends on the facts of the case.
What does Rule 402 say?
R.402: General Admissibility for Relevant Evidence
Relevant evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise:
+ the United States Constitution;
+ a federal statute;
+ these rules; or
+ other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court
Irrelevant evidence is not admissible
How do we know when evidence creates an unfair prejudice?
Evidence creates “unfair prejudice” when there’s an “undue tendency to suggest a decision on an improper basis, commonly, though not necessarily, an emotional one”
What does Rule 403 say?
R. 403: Inadmissibility of Relevant Evidence
The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following:
+ unfair prejudice
+ confusing the issues
+ misleading the jury
+ undue delay
+ wasting time
+ needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
What is the measure of whether or not a piece of evidence is prejudicial?
SUBSTANTIALLY OUTWEIGHED
+ Are there alternatives? Excluding evidence because it is unfairly prejudicial should be a last resort
+ The need for relevant evidence is often considered greater than the potential harm that could result from the admission of at least some prejudicial evidence
True or false: R.403 rulings are rarely reversed on appeal
True. Presume evidence is being introduced: Burden of the party trying to keep evidence out to show the unfair prejudice outweighs the probative value
What is a “reverse R.403”?
“Reverse 403”: Rules say this can only come in IF probative value outweighs prejudicial value. Presumption that the evidence is not coming in unless the party wanting to bring it in can prove the value.
What are some circumstances where R.403 would come into play?
Where you’ll see R.403 in play: Helpful < Misleading
+ “Social identity” – stereotypes, statistics on social injustice
+ Character evidence (but character evidence has its own rules)
+ Gruesome photos and evidence of violence
+ Statistical evidence – “You got the wrong guy”
+ Scientific Evidence – replicating series of events that are “substantially similar”
+ Similar events, acts, occurrences
What are exceptions to the general rule against allowing similar events would be included despite a prejudicial effect?
Showing a lack of similar occurrences is even more prejudicial, generally excluded
+ Show causation
+ Show dangerous condition existed
+ Show mental of state of a party when at issue
+ Rebut a party’s claim of impossibility
+ Real property value/sales
+ Show meaning of contract, provision, document for customary usage
True or false: Judges can make the ultimate decision if evidence is overly prejudicial and if it will be admitted.
True. Judges have the discretion to conditionally admit evidence so long as a reasonable jury could find by a preponderance of the evidence that the fact exists (the missing link in that evidence will be connected up by proof of the missing fact) (RULE 104(b)).
What is conditional relevance?
Conditionally relevant: the proponent of the evidence must offer foundational evidence sufficient to support a jury’s finding that the condition has been fulfilled.
What are the common objections for evidence?
Hearsay (801)
Authentication (RULE 901)
Relevance (RULE 401)
Prejudicial (RULE 403)
Privilege/Quasi Privilege (RULES 407-411)
Original Writing (best evidence rule) (RULE 1002)
