What is the test for relevant evidence in a sexual assault case?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Cunningham, 108 Cal.Rptr.2d 291, 25 Cal.4th 926, 25 P.3d 519 (Cal. 2001):
The rules regarding the admissibility of evidence are well established. Only relevant evidence is admissible. (Evid.Code, 350.) Evidence is relevant if it has "any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action." (Evid. Code, 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.] The trial court retains broad discretion in determining the relevance of evidence." (People v. Garceau (1993) 6 Cal.4th 140, 177, 24 Cal.
[108 Cal.Rptr.2d 345]
Rptr.2d 664, 862 P.2d 664; People v. Hart (1999) 20 Cal.4th 546, 606, fn. 16, 85 Cal. Rptr.2d 132, 976 P.2d 683.)[108 Cal.Rptr.2d 345]
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
