Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Minor premise this person was in possession of stolen

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: perty had been stolen is likely the thief. Minor premise, this person was in possession of stolen property a couple seconds after it had been stolen Conclusion it is more likely than before that the person stole the property. Notes on Rule 403: Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Ground of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time. FRE 403: Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time "Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence." Scope and purpose of Rule 403: Rule 403 authorizes the exclusion of relevant evidence if the legitimate probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the potential damage that the evidence might do to the orderly, efficient, and fair process of trial. Since Rule 403 calls for a weighing or balancing judgment, its application necessarily invo...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online