In a murder trial, how would a defense attorney properly object in court if prosecution is trying to offer into evidence a gun SIMILAR to a gun known to belong to the defendent but the gun found at the crime seen had no serial number, fingerprints, and there were not bullets to compare from the victim or empty shells etc. to link the gun to the defendent?
Category: Law School Exam
Under FRE 401, only relevant information is admissible. Evidence is relevant if it has “any tendency to make the existence of a material fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. Even if judge has doubts about the validity of a generalization, she will probably consider the evidence relevant, since FRE 401 says that if evidence has “any tendency” to make FOC more or less probable, it's relevant. Therefore, the ownership of the gun in this case most likely will be deemed relevant.
Under FRE403, however, even relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of Unfair prejudice, Confusion of the issues, Misleading the jury, Causing undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. Although the ownership of the gun is relevant, it may mislead the jury by associating the ownership of the gun with the crime itself, causing undue delay by having to help the jury overcome that confusion, confuse the issue by focusing on the ownership that is not directly relevant to the crime itself, and thus a waste of time and amount to the needless presentatino of cumulative evidence. Therefore, defendant's attorney may object this relevant evidence b/c the probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
Reply With Quote