California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Jones, C076754 (Cal. App. 2017):
Only relevant evidence is admissible. (Evid. Code, 350.) Relevant evidence is evidence "having any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action." (Id. 210.) " 'The test of relevance is whether the evidence tends "logically, naturally, and by reasonable inference" to establish material facts such as identity, intent, or motive. [Citations.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Bivert (2011) 52 Cal.4th 96, 116-117.)
Relevant evidence may be excluded "if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will (a) necessitate undue consumption of time or (b) create substantial danger of undue prejudice, of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury." (Evid. Code, 352.) Undue prejudice for purposes of Evidence Code section 352 means " 'evidence that tends to evoke an emotional bias against the defendant with very little effect on issues, not evidence that is probative of a defendant's guilt.' " (People v. Valdez (2012) 55 Cal.4th 82, 133; accord, People v. Crew (2003) 31 Cal.4th 822, 842.)
We will not disturb a trial court's exercise of discretion in admitting or excluding evidence "except on a showing the trial court exercised its discretion in an arbitrary, capricious, or patently absurd manner that resulted in a manifest miscarriage of justice [citation]." (People v. Rodriguez (1999) 20 Cal.4th 1, 9-10.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.