Federal Rule Of Evidence Essay

Federal Rule of Evidence 403 says, “The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence” (2015). A defense attorney could utilize Motion in limine to request that the judge rule that certain testimony be excluded. The motion is always discussed outside the presence of the jury and is always decided by a judge. For example, after examining police reports and other documents it is detected that the crime scene was contaminated which could be argued that any DNA evidence taken from the scene is compromised and therefore any scientific evidence or expert opinions relating to this would be prejudicial. Another example could be that law enforcement did not procure proper search warrants before a search and seizure; therefore, all evidence gathered resulted in an improper discovery and should be excluded since it violates
In regards to limiting a victim’s voice, Neubauer and Fradella gave the example of special circumstances under Payne v. Tennessee, which supports victim impact evidence; however, it can be disallowed on due process grounds if inflammatory and highly prejudicial (2007). The example given in the text is in Salazar v. State (2002):
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals invalidated the use of a 17-minute video that displayed 140 photos of the deceased victim, arranged chronologically from infancy through adulthood. The court concluded that the montage, set to the music of Enya and Celine Dion’s, My Heart Will Go On, was unfairly prejudicial (Neubauer & Fradella, 2007. p. 238. para