EVIDENCE OUTLINE
RUEBNER
RELEVANCY
· Relevancy is not an inherent characteristic of any item of evidence but exists as a relation between an item of evidence and a proposition sought to be proved. If an item of evidence tends to prove or disprove any proposition, it is relevant to that proposition. If that proposition itself is one provable in the case at bar, then the offered item of evidence has probative value in the case.
· Evidence offered in a cause, or a question propounded, is material when it is relevant and goes to the substantial matters in dispute, or has a legitimate and effective influence or bearing on the decision of the case.
Rule 401: Is it Relevant?
Rule 402: Should it be admitted or excluded?
Rule 403: Should the evidence be excluded under the court’s discretionary power of balancing the probative value with unfair prejudice?
Rule 401
Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
Notes:
· Any Tendency: Low threshold, relevancy is not decided on a preponderance of the evidence standard.
· Of Consequence: Something is “of consequence” or “material” when it goes towards proving the elements of the cause of action, charge, or of the substantive law.
· This rule is extremely broad, even evidence having only the slightest probative value qualifies. It does not have to prove anything by itself, but can be a small piece of a mosaic tending to make the existence of a fact more or less likely.
· But even though rule 401 establishes a low threshold of relevance, evidence having only marginal probative force is more likely to be excluded under rule 403 on grounds of unfair prejudice or misleading the jury or wasting time.
Role of the judge and jury
· Most of the time it is the judge who decides the relevancy of the evidence at the time it is offered. 104(a)
· Sometimes the relevancy of the evidence depends on a preliminary question of fact, such as whether a document is genuine or is a forgery. Such cases are said to involve issues of conditional relevancy. Rule 104(b)
o In those instances, the judge does not resolve the preliminary question of fact, but decides only whether there is sufficient evidence to support it. If there is, the judge must submit the document to the jury to make the ultimate determinatio
· An offer to stipulate must be considered by the court in making a 403 ruling; the trial judge has discretion to exclude evidence when the opposing party is willing to stipulate to the point being proved.
· A party is not necessarily required to accept an opponent’s offer to stipulate, however. Courts may reject stipulations when they are incomplete or would unfairly deny a party the full force of its proof.
· Evidence will not be excluded by a judge simply because he does not find the evidence credible; questions of credibility are for the jury.
Relation to other rules:
· Prior crime impeachment
o Rule 609(a)(1) which authorizes impeachment of evidence of prior convictions, expressly incorporates rule 403 as a limit on impeachment of witnesses other than the accused.
o However, most courts hold that rule 403 cannot be used to prevent impeachment by prior convictions involving dishonesty or false statement under rule 609(a)(2).
Prior acts.
