CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Discretion to Exclude Relevant Evid.
......Balancing Prob. Value & Prejudice
.........Prejudice Outweighs Prob. Value
 19 Cards On This Topic:
  • Methamphetamine recipes found in truck of D tried as felon possessing firearm, and DEA testimony on meth labs and guns, should have been excluded as unduly prejudicial.
  • Though admitting evidence that V's mother allowed her other child to be around convicted child molester was of limited probative value and abuse of discretion, error harmless.
  • Court did not abuse discretion in excluding testimony of V's friend that V received obscene phone message weeks before murder where caller's identity entirely speculative and information had potential to distract jury.
  • Evidence that V, killed so he wouldn't testify re robbery, made erroneous identification of one of robbers from a photographic array excludable under EC 352 as only slightly probative on issues in murder trial.
  • Error not to accept defense stipulation re testimony by murder V's parent.
  • Error to admit evidence of D's indebtedness to establish motive for robbery and murder unless admitted to refute claim he did not need money.
  • Even when patient's psychotherapeutic records are relevant and discoverable, court may limit or exclude utilizing Evid. Code §352 discretion.
  • Evidence primarily designed to inflame is unduly prejudicial.
  • Judgment reversed where trial ct. allowed evidence of incidents irrelevant to plaintiff's nuisance claim; error was prejudicial.
  • Reversible error to admit testimony of attempted kidnap V to show D's propensity to commit a sexual offense as prejudice outweighed probative value.
  • Evidence of P's intimate personal life not relevant to PI claim re tire defects; to extent relevant, it should have been excluded as unduly prejudicial and its admission caused miscarriage of justice.
  • Reversible error not to grant D new trial on all charges where extremely prejudicial gang evidence was not relevant to underlying charges and there was insufficient evidence the crimes were gang motivated.
  • Although evidence regarding common gang membership admissible for impeachment, court abused its discretion in further admitting wide-ranging testimony about gangs' criminal tendencies.
  • Court could properly exclude proposed defense expert testimony re DNA testing as irrelevant where it would have no probative value in light of way case being tried, or would have minimal probative value and court exercised discretion.
  • Evidence D used Penal Code section indicating "murder" as beeper number in communicating with co-conspirator not relevant to any fact other than disposition to commit murder.
  • Probative value of lewd photos introduced to impeach D's testimony was far outweighed by prejudice.
  • Evidence of mother's prenatal drug use improperly admitted in murder trial of child where no evidence that drug use contributed.
  • Cases holding evidence of gang membership improper.
  • Cases in which prejudice found to outweigh probative value.


    •