What is relevant and potentially admissible evidence in a sexual assault case?

Evidence is relevant, and therefore potentially admissible, if it tends to prove, logically, naturally or by reasonable inference, a material element at issue, such as intent or motive. (Evid. Code, 210, 350; People v. Daniels (1991) 52 Cal.3d 815, 856.) Although evidence of prior acts is not admissible to prove conduct on a specific occasion, it is admissible to prove motive, preparation, intent, knowledge or absence of mistake.

Page 6

(Evid. Code, 1101, subd. (b); People v. Robertson (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 965, 989.) The court may, however, exclude evidence if the prejudicial effect of the evidence outweighs its probative value. (Evid. Code, 352.)

Where the relevance of a piece of evidence depends on the existence of a preliminary fact, the proponent of the evidence has the burden to produce evidence sufficient to sustain a finding as to the existence of the preliminary fact. (Evid. Code, 403.) The jury is typically required to make the ultimate determination as to the existence of a preliminary fact as such questions involve the credibility of testimony or the probative value of evidence. (People v. Cottone (2013) 57 Cal.4th 269, 283-284 (Cottone); People v. Lucas (1995) 12 Cal.4th 415, 466-467.) The court is simply to decide whether there is evidence sufficient to permit the jury to determine the existence of the preliminary fact or, put another way, if the evidence is simply too weak to support a favorable finding by the jury. (Cottone, at pp. 283-284.)