California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Stiggins, F060163 (Cal. App. 2011):
No judgment shall be reversed on account of the erroneous exclusion of evidence unless it appears, upon examining the entire cause including the evidence, a miscarriage of justice has occurred. A miscarriage of justice should be declared only when the reviewing court is convinced after an examination of the entire case, including the evidence, that it is reasonably probable a result more favorable to the appellant would have been reached absent the error. (In re Marriage of Smith (1978) 79 Cal.App.3d 725, 751.) Expressed another way, where a trial court's ruling does not constitute a refusal to allow the defendant to present a defense, but merely rejected certain evidence concerning the defense, the ruling does not constitute a violation of due process. In that situation, the appropriate standard of review is whether it is reasonably probable the admission of the evidence would have resulted in a verdict more favorable to the defendant. (People v. Espinoza (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 1287, 1317.)
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.