Evidence Rules

Rule 104(a)

The court decides preliminary questions about whether a witness is qualified, a privilege exists, or evidence is admissible. Bound by privilege rules, but not other evidence rules.

Rule 104

Preliminary Questions

Rule 104(b)

When relevance depends on whether a fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist. Court may admit provisionally subject to later proof.

Rule 104(c)

Conducting hearing so jury can’t hear on prelim question if (1) hearing involves the admissibility of a confession; (2) a defendant in a criminal case is a witness and so requests; or (3) justice so requires.

Rule 104(d)

By testifying on a preliminary question, a defendant in a criminal case does not become subject to cross-examination on other issues in the case

Rule 104(e)

This rule does not limit a party’s right to introduce before the jury evidence that is relevant to the weight or credibility of other evidence

Rule 105 (Limiting Evidence That Is Not Admissible Against Other Parties or for Other Purposes)

If evidence is admissible against a party or for a purpose—but not against another party or for another purpose—the court, on timely request, MUST restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly.

Rule 401 (Test for Relevant Evidence)

Logical Relevancy: It has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; AND Materiality: The fact is of consequence in determining the action. (Connecting it to something that needs to be proved)

Rule 402

• Relevant evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise:

  • the United States Constitution;

  • a federal statute;

  • these rules; or (important bc there are lots of other exclusionary rules in the Rules of Evidence!)

  • other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court.

Rule 403

The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is SUBSTANTIALLY OUTWEIGHED by a danger of: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.

Rule 403 Process

• Process

  1. Judge determines probative value of proferred evidence

  2. Court identifies presence of any enumerated dangers OR efficiency considerations

  3. Court balances probative value against identified dangers/considerations

Rule 404(a)

Character Evidence: Evidence of a person's character or character trait is NOT admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait (propensity).

Rule 404(a)(2)

Exceptions:In criminal cases: (A) Defendant may offer evidence of bad character trait of victim, prosecutor can rebut; (B) Defendant may offer evidence of own good trait, prosecutor can rebut; (C) Homicide case: prosecutor can offer victim's peaceful character to rebut claim victim was first aggressor.

Rule 404(a)(3)

Exceptions for witness: Evidence of a witness’s character may be admitted under Rules 607, 608, and 609 (truthfulness for impeachment)

Rule 404(b)

Crimes, wrongs, or other acts are NOT admissible to prove character/propensity. MAY be admissible for non-propensity purposes: Motive, Opportunity, Intent, Preparation, Plan, Knowledge, Identity, Absence of mistake, or Lack of accident (M.O.I.P.P.K.I.A.).

Rule 405(a) (Methods of Proving Character - By Reputation or Opinion)

When character evidence is admissible, it may be proved by testimony about reputation or by opinion testimony. On cross-examination, inquiry into relevant specific instances of conduct is allowed.

Rule 405(b) (Methods of Proving Character - By Specific Instances of Conduct)

When a person's character or character trait is an ESSENTIAL ELEMENT of a charge, claim, or defense (e.g., defamation, negligent entrustment), character may also be proved by specific instances of conduct.