3.3 Evidence: Relevance, Rule 403 Balancing & Character Exceptions

🎯 Essential Doctrinal Takeaways

• Under FRE 403, relevant evidence is excluded only if its probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
• Evidence of other crimes or bad acts is inadmissible to prove criminal propensity under FRE 404(b)(1).
• Other bad acts are admissible under FRE 404(b)(2) for non-character purposes: Motive, Intent, Mistake absence, Identity, Common plan (MIMIC).
• In criminal cases, the defendant may open the door to pertinent good character traits through reputation or opinion testimony (FRE 404(a)(2)).

Under Federal Rule of Evidence 401, evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence, and the fact is of consequence in determining the action. Relevant evidence is presumptively admissible under Rule 402.

Federal Rule of Evidence 403 is heavily weighted in favor of admissibility. The trial judge has discretion to exclude relevant evidence only if its probative value is 'substantially outweighed' by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, or wasting time. Graphic video depicting the actual crime or tort is directly probative and rarely excluded under Rule 403.

Character evidence is generally inadmissible to prove that a person acted in conformity with that character on a particular occasion (Rule 404(a)). However, under Rule 404(b)(2), uncharged misconduct is admissible to prove other facts, such as Motive, Opportunity, Intent, Preparation, Plan, Knowledge, Identity (modus operandi), or Absence of Mistake (MIMIC).

⚠️ NextGen Bar Examination Traps & Pitfalls

• Excluding graphic direct evidence under Rule 403 simply because it evokes an emotional reaction.
• Attempting to introduce prior bad acts to demonstrate that a defendant has a 'criminal mindset' or disposition.
• Introducing specific instances of conduct on direct examination when proving character under Rule 405.