Admissible
Defendant is charged with committing a murder in the fun zone of a county fair. Prosecutor seeks to call a witness to say that defendant was in the fun zone at the time of the shooting, and left immediately thereafter. The defense objects, “Relevance, defendant left quickly because he got a text message from his girlfriend saying she was going into labor.”
Overrule. A witness saying the defendant was present at the scene of the murder and left right after the shooting makes it more probable that he was involved. Under Rule 401, evidence only needs any tendency to make a fact more or less probable, not prove it outright.
The defense’s explanation doesn’t erase the relevance — it just gives the jury an alternative explanation. That goes to weight, not admissibility.
Defendant is charged with attempted murder. Police recover one of the bullets from the victim’s arm, and run ballistics tests. Prosecutor seeks to call an expert witness to testify that the bullet he recovered could be a match to defendant’s gun, but the recovered bullets are in such poor condition that the expert cannot say for sure and cannot quantify probabilities. The defense objects, “Relevance.”
Overrule. Again, weight not admissibility. Even though the expert cannot be certain or give a percentage, his opinion that the bullet could match the defendant’s gun still makes it slightly more probable that the defendant was the shooter than if there were no such link at all. Rule 401 doesn’t require certainty, just any tendency to move the needle toward proving a consequential fact.
Defendant is charged with a drive-by shooting. The police recover the semiautomatic assault weapon used in the shooting. The gun is tested for fingerprints, and none of them comes back to defendant. Defendant wishes to introduce this result. Prosecutor objects, “Relevance.”
Overrule. Less likely that he fired the gun.
Defendant is charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm. A felony is any crime punishable by more than one year of incarceration. Defendant wants to testify that she did not know her prior conviction was a felony. Prosecutor objects, “Relevance.”
Sustain. Defendant’s knowledge of the classification of her prior conviction is not an element nor a defense to being a felon in possession.
Defendant is charged with unlawfully possessing guns and drugs. Prosecutor seeks to introduce rap lyrics posted by defendant on his social media page. The rap lyrics glorify guns and drugs. Defense objects.
Sustain. Absent evidence suggesting that the lyrics were meant to memorialize or relate actual events, rap lyrics are not relevant to show that the person engaged in the activity glorified in those lyrics.
Defendant is charged with murder. While the charges are pending, defendant gets a tattoo on his forehead matching the Penal Code section for murder in that state. Prosecutor seeks to admit this fact. The defense objects, “Relevance.”
Overrule. A defendant voluntarily tattooing the Penal Code section for murder on his forehead while awaiting trial tends to make it more probable that he committed the crime — or at least sees himself as associated with it.
The defense can argue alternative explanations (e.g., it’s a joke, it’s expressive speech), but that goes to weight, not admissibility.
Defendant is charged with murder and personal use of a deadly weapon (specifically, a knife). Prosecutor seeks to introduce evidence that, during a search, several knives were found in defendant’s bedroom. The defense objects, “Relevance.”
Sustain. Unless there is something indicating that the knives are in some manner tied to the murder weapon (e.g., part of the same collection of knives as the murder weapon), defendant’s possession of unrelated knives does not “move the needle.”
Defendant is charged with rape. He wants to introduce evidence that the police investigated another suspect before he was charged with the crime. Prosecutor objects, “Relevance.”
Depends on the quantum of evidence linking the other suspect to the crime, and on which jurisdiction you are in (as the Federal Rules are more open to admitting evidence on this point than some states, such as California). As long as there is some foundation linking the other suspect to the crime, the objection should be overruled — the jury gets to weigh it.
Prosecutor/plaintiff seeks to introduce evidence that defendant is very wealthy in: (1) A criminal case where defendant is charged with murder. Defense objects; (2) A civil case where the victim’s family has sued defendant for wrongful death. Defense objects.
(1) Sustain. (2) Overrule, In a civil suit, if the plaintiffs are seeking punitive damages, the defendant’s net worth actually matters. Why? Punitive damages are meant to punish and deter, and the punishment must be scaled to the defendant’s financial situation (a $50,000 penalty means nothing to a billionaire but ruins an average person).
Defendant is charged with defrauding investors. Prosecutor wants to use evidence that defendant was living a lavish lifestyle at the time of the fraud, including pictures of defendant’s fancy house, car and parties. Defense objects.
Overrule. Evidence of defendant’s lavish lifestyle may be relevant to prove (a) income from the fraud, and (b) an attempt to “appear” wealthy in order to attract potential investors.