Is there any prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Johnson, D069901 (Cal. App. 2016):

"The prejudice which exclusion of evidence under Evidence Code section 352 is designed to avoid is not the prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence. '[A]ll evidence which tends to prove guilt is prejudicial or damaging to the defendant's case. The stronger the evidence, the more it is "prejudicial." The "prejudice" referred to in Evidence Code section 352 applies to evidence which uniquely tends to evoke an emotional bias against the defendant as an individual and which has very little effect on the issues. In applying section 352,

Page 16

"prejudicial" is not synonymous with "damaging."'" (People v. Karis (1988) 46 Cal.3d 612, 638.)

2. Admissibility of gang membership evidence

Other Questions


Is exclusion of evidence designed to avoid prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence? (California, United States of America)
Is exclusion of evidence intended to avoid prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence? (California, United States of America)
Is there any undue prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence? (California, United States of America)
Is prejudicial or damaging to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence? (California, United States of America)
What is the definition of prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from probative evidence? (California, United States of America)
When the evidence is sufficient to sustain some but not all alleged damages, when the evidence does not support all of the damages, will the court reduce the judgment to the amount supported by the evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does the exclusion of a single item of marginally relevant evidence under California Evidence Code section 352 preclude a defendant from presenting his "consensual sexual relationship" defense? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant have a constitutional right to present highly probative evidence in support of his mistake of law defense? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a defense counsel to argue that the evidence presented to a jury under duress was relevant and probative to the element of duress? (California, United States of America)
What is the relevant evidence that the prosecutor and defense counsel may have to present to the jury at the penalty phase of a sexual assault case? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.