Relevance Under Rules 401, 402, and 403

Relevance Under FRE 401, 402, and 403

Goal on Evidence Fact Pattern

  • Determine whether each piece of evidence is admissible or inadmissible.

Gateway Issue: Relevance

  • Rule 402: Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.

  • Evidence must be relevant to be admissible, serving as the initial hurdle.

  • Relevance doesn't guarantee automatic admissibility; it's just the first step.

Rule 401: Logical Relevance

  • Evidence is relevant if it is both probative and material.

    • Probative: Evidence has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

    • Material: The fact is of consequence in determining the outcome of the action.

  • Most evidence is logically relevant because parties generally aim to admit evidence that helps the fact-finder (jury) determine the facts of the case.

  • 401 sets a very low bar for admissibility

Illustration of Probative Value

  • Example: Car accident case where the key fact is whether the stoplight was red or green.

    • Simplified scenario: 50% chance the light was green, 50% chance it was red.

  • Witness Testimony: Witness testifies, "I think the light was green," but admits uncertainty.

    • Even with uncertainty, the testimony has some tendency to make it more probable that the light was green (e.g., shifting probability from 50% to 51%).

    • The weight of the evidence is for the jury to decide.

  • Key Point: If the evidence has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable, it has probative value.

Example Scenario Where Evidence Lacks Probative Value

  • Witness says, "I wasn't looking; I have no idea what color the light was."

    • This testimony doesn't change the probability of the light color being either red or green (still 50/50).

  • Something purely speculative would also lack probative value (e.g., basing testimony on a dream).

Materiality

  • Is the fact of consequence in determining the outcome of the action. The threshold is 1%.

  • Impact of materiality: credibility of the witnesses, elements of the crime, claim, or affirmative defense are always material.

  • Damages also constitute materiality.

Illustration of Materiality

  • In the car accident example, the color of the light is highly material as it directly relates to the claim.

  • If a witness testifies about the color of the light, it's a relevant fact under 401.

Scenario Where Evidence Lacks Materiality

  • Witness testifies, "I had pancakes for breakfast the morning of the accident."

    • While this testimony does make the fact those pancakes eaten more probable that it did happen, it's likely immaterial because it doesn't impact credibility, elements of the case, or damages.

    • Unless, of course, the witness has an allergy to pancakes that affects their sensory competence (e.g., blurry vision), in which case it becomes material to their credibility.

    • Any fact that shines light in almost any way is going to be enough. We don't need the whole brick wall; as long as the fact is a brick in that wall, it's going to be enough to satisfy Rule 401.

Rule 403 Legal Relevance

  • A check and balance on Rule 401.

  • Deals with excluding relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.