Rule 401. Definition of “Relevant Evidence”
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.
I. Threshold requirement
A. Every piece of evidence has to pass rule 401
B. Low Threshold!
1. Any tendency to prove a fact or consequence
a. Evidence involves a relationship between the facts you’re trying to admit and some fact that is of some consequence to the determination of the action.
i. Materiality: There must be a link between the factual proposition which the evidence tends to establish, and the substantive law.
· Ex: A saw B driving 55 mph. If the speed limit is 35 it is material because it affects a fundamental substantive issue in the case (If B was negligent). If the speed limit is 55, there is no link.
b. Fact A makes it more likely or less likely that Fact B happened
II. Admissibility v. Weight
A. If it tips the scales one way or the other it’s relevant
1. Doesn’t matter if probative value is low.
2. How probative the evidence is may matter in conjunction with other rules (like 403)
B. Jury decides how much weight to give
III. Types of Evidence
A. Direct: does not rely upon an inference
B. Circumstantial: consists of proof of facts from which other connected facts are established
1. Assessment of probative value based on experience and logic, not law.
2. Judge must follow the “chain of inference.”
IV. You can make an attack on relevancy in one of two ways
A. Fact A is not probative of Fact B, a fact of consequence
B. Fact A is probative of Fact C, but Fact C not a fact of consequence
V. Ex:
A. Skreech’s on trial.
1. The question to the officer is what kind of eyes does Skreech have.
a. Need a connection
i. Don’t know if this is relevant because you don’t know the fact of consequence.
ii. If a witness testifies that the killer has blue eyes, then it’s relevant.
2. Skreech purchased a car with a police ban radio 3 months before AC’s murder
a. Shows motive
b. Depends on how tightly you can connect the facts
c. If too remote in time (like 2 years) there won’t be a connection
VI. Rule 104(B) Conditional Relevancy
A. When the relevancy of evidence depends on fulfillment of condition or fact, the court shall admit it upon, or subject to, the introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding of the fulfillment of the condition.
1. One item of evidence is relevant only if another item of evidence is established.
Evidence that is relevant
a side issue, it’s not an issue that needs to be determined for the outcome of the case at bar.
2. Involves some previous litigation.
3. Quasi scientific evidence that might have an aura of infallibility (junk science)
B. Side/tangential issue
1. Evidence tends to create some sort of side issue.
2. Side issue: The resolution of which is not relevant to or at all important to deciding the case at bar.
C. Previous litigation
1. Introduction of previous litigation is generally not allowed
2. Probative value is generally low (unless collateral estoppel or res judicata)
D. Quasi scientific evidence
1. Relates to expert testimony
2. Very difficult to exclude under 403 scientific evidence that meets the test in 702 and 703 for the admissibility of expert testimony.
VI. Waste of time/unnecessary delay
A. Basis for limiting:
1. Cumulative Evidence
a. The number of witnesses to prove a fact
b. Repitious evidence
2. Evidence which represents an inefficient use of the court’s time when compared with probative value
