Evidence: Rule 403 balancing
Rule 403: cost/benefit analysis- unfair prejudice
- confusion of issues
- misleading
- undue delay, waste, cumulative
Rule 403 interacts with Rules 401 and 402:- All relevant evidence is inherently prejudicial
- The 403 balancing process presents an accuracy dilemma
- Evidence is not an island onto itself
- Unfair prejudice occurs when an item of evidence provokes the jury to decide a case on an improper basis
- The mere fact that an item of evidence causes jurors to have an emotional response does not make it unfairly prejudicial
- Jurors are not logic machines
- Rule 403 offsets the lax standard set forth in Rules 401 & 402
- Unfair prejudice is not the only basis for exclusion under Rule 403
- Rule 403 (almost) always applicable and should (usually) be the last stop in determining admissibility
