Can a defendant be denied a fair trial when relevant evidence is excluded from the trial?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Lopez, B257670 (Cal. App. 2016):
A defendant is denied a fair trial in violation of due process requirements when a trial court excludes relevant evidence that has significant probative value to his defense. (People v. Babbitt (1988) 45 Cal.3d 660, 684.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.
Other Questions
Does Defendant have a reciprocal obligation to disclose all relevant evidence obtained before trial, including rebuttal evidence it intends to use at trial? (California, United States of America)
Does the trial court abuse its discretion when it denied a defendant's motion to exclude the testimony of Page 35 of the Defendant's lawyer as more prejudicial than probative? (California, United States of America)
Does the Court have authority to exclude evidence where a defendant has been found to be contrary to the evidence code under section 352 of the California Evidence Code? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
Does a motion for a new trial need to be denied because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for new trial? (California, United States of America)
Does section 352 of the California Evidence Code preclude a defendant from presenting all relevant evidence at trial? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances of the crime scene evidence will be admitted during the penalty phase of a penalty trial, does the trial court error not to exclude the evidence? (California, United States of America)
In a motion for a new trial on a charge of sexual assault brought by defendant Perez, who has pleaded not guilty to the charge, is the evidence insufficient to support his claim of insufficiency of evidence? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances would a defendant have been denied a continuance of his trial on the grounds that the trial would have been more favorable to him? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant obtain a new trial on the grounds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion to deny the motion on the same grounds as the previous motion? (California, United States of America)
