California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Wallace, C070914, C070933 (Cal. App. 2014):
" 'If evidence is directly probative of the crimes charged and can be introduced at the time of the case in chief, it should be.' [Citation.] '[P]roper rebuttal evidence does not include a material part of the case in the prosecution's possession that tends to establish the defendant's commission of the crime. It is restricted to evidence made necessary by the defendant's case in the sense that he has introduced new evidence or made assertions that were not implicit in his denial of guilt.' [Citation.] [] The reasons for the restrictions on rebuttal evidence are 'to (1) ensure the orderly presentation of evidence so that the trier of fact is not confused; (2) to prevent the prosecution from "unduly magnifying certain evidence by dramatically introducing it late in the trial;" and (3) to avoid "unfair surprise" to the defendant from sudden confrontation with an additional piece of crucial evidence.' [Citations.]" (People v. Mayfield(1997) 14 Cal.4th 668, 761.)
Page 34
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.