Relevance and Its Limits: every key term you need (+ practice quiz)
25 flashcard terms for Evidence Topic 1, written to match the course framework. Study them here, then drill them as interactive flashcards, or test yourself with the 15-question quiz — free, no account needed.
Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. The bar is minimal logical relevance, not sufficiency.
Probative value
The degree to which an item of evidence actually advances the inquiry into a disputed fact. Courts assess it in light of the evidentiary need, the strength of the inference, and the availability of substitute proof.
Materiality
The requirement, folded into FRE 401 as a fact of consequence in determining the action, that the proposition sought to be proved matter under the governing substantive law or procedural posture.
Fact of consequence
A proposition that bears on an element, a defense, damages, credibility, or a preliminary factual issue. The pleadings and the controlling substantive law define what qualifies.
FRE 402 general admissibility
Relevant evidence is admissible unless the Constitution, a federal statute, the Rules of Evidence, or other Supreme Court rules provide otherwise. Irrelevant evidence is never admissible.
FRE 403 balancing test
A court may exclude relevant evidence when its probative value is substantially outweighed by dangers such as unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, waste of time, or needless cumulative proof.
Unfair prejudice
The tendency of evidence to suggest decision on an improper emotional basis or an improper inference such as bad character. Damaging evidence is not unfairly prejudicial merely because it hurts the opponent.
Confusion of the issues
A FRE 403 danger arising when evidence invites the jury into collateral disputes or mini-trials that distract from the actual questions the jury must decide.
Misleading the jury
A FRE 403 danger that arises when jurors are likely to overvalue evidence or draw an unwarranted inference from it, as with weakly grounded statistics or dramatic demonstrations.
Needless cumulative evidence
Repetitive proof on a point already well established. Under FRE 403 a judge may cut off additional witnesses or exhibits to control undue delay and waste of time.
Conditional relevance (FRE 104(b))
When relevance depends on whether a fact exists, proof must be sufficient to support a jury finding of that fact. The judge screens for sufficiency and the jury ultimately decides whether the condition is met.
Preliminary questions (FRE 104(a))
The court decides admissibility questions such as privilege, qualification of a witness, and most foundational issues by a preponderance, and is not bound by the evidence rules except those on privilege.
Connecting up
The practice of admitting evidence subject to later proof of the missing conditional fact. If the proponent never supplies the connection, the opponent should move to strike and request an instruction to disregard.
FRE 105 limiting instruction
When evidence is admissible for one party or one purpose but not another, the court on request restricts the evidence to its proper scope and instructs the jury accordingly. Failure to request usually waives the point.
FRE 106 rule of completeness
When a party introduces part of a writing or recorded statement, an adverse party may require introduction at that time of any other part that in fairness ought to be considered contemporaneously.
Old Chief v. United States
The Supreme Court held that where a felon in possession defendant offers to stipulate to prior conviction status, the record of the specific prior offense has little added probative value and its admission was an abuse of discretion under FRE 403.
Evidentiary alternatives
Under the Old Chief analysis, a judge gauging probative value may consider substitute means of proof, including admissions and stipulations, though the prosecution generally retains the right to tell a coherent narrative.
Stipulation
An agreement between parties that a fact is established, removing it from dispute. A stipulation can reduce the need for graphic or inflammatory proof but does not automatically bar all other evidence of that fact.
FRE 407 subsequent remedial measures
Later repairs, design changes, or policy changes are inadmissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect, or a need for warning, but may come in for disputed ownership or control, feasibility, or impeachment.
FRE 408 compromise offers
Offers or acceptances of a valuable consideration to settle a disputed claim, and statements made in compromise negotiations, are inadmissible to prove or disprove validity or amount, or to impeach by prior inconsistent statement.
FRE 409 medical payments
Offering or paying medical, hospital, or similar expenses arising from an injury is inadmissible to prove liability. Unlike FRE 408, accompanying factual admissions are not protected by this rule.
FRE 410 plea discussions
Withdrawn guilty pleas, no contest pleas, and statements made during plea discussions with a prosecuting attorney that do not result in a guilty plea are generally inadmissible against the defendant who made them.
FRE 411 liability insurance
Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is inadmissible to show negligent or wrongful conduct, but is admissible for other purposes such as agency, ownership, control, or witness bias.
Direct versus circumstantial evidence
Direct evidence proves a fact without an inferential step, such as eyewitness testimony to the act. Circumstantial evidence requires an inference, and neither type is inherently entitled to greater weight.
Curative admissibility
The doctrine allowing a party to answer improper or misleading evidence introduced by the opponent with otherwise inadmissible evidence, but only to the extent needed to remove the unfair advantage created.