CA Evidence Code - Rules of Admissibility in Criminal Trials
In criminal trials, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, a high standard that keeps the focus on legally admissible evidence under California law. Defense attorneys may object if the evidence does not meet this standard.
If the court sustains the objection, that specific piece of evidence will be excluded from the jury's view and hearing.
The State of California has extensive "rules of admissibility" determining which evidence can be presented at a jury trial and which cannot.
These rules are detailed in the California Evidence Code, which specifies what types of evidence are allowed in criminal jury trials.
Key rules of evidence include relevance, reliability, witness qualification, questioning procedures, hearsay rule, privileges, prohibitions on character evidence, preventing jury prejudice, and avoiding confusion or misleading the jury.
If the prosecutor breaks a rule of evidence during your trial, your California criminal defense lawyer can object to exclude that evidence. If the judge refuses, you might appeal the conviction, arguing the evidence was improperly admitted.
Let's examine some of the most frequently used admissibility rules invoked by defense attorneys.
Evidence Code 210 EC - Relevance Rule
The essential evidence rules require that evidence be relevant to the issues in court and demonstrate some level of reliability. This focus on relevance helps ensure your case is judged on meaningful facts, making the process feel fair and transparent.
Relevant evidence refers to any evidence that reasonably tends to prove or disprove a fact in dispute that could affect the case's outcome.
Evidence Code 1200 EC - Hearsay Rule
Hearsay is described as an out-of-court statement introduced to establish the truth of the matter claimed. For example, if someone says, "I heard Robert say that he saw the defendant commit the murder," this is regarded as hearsay.
Hearsay is usually not admissible under Evidence Code 1200 EC unless it falls within one of the many exceptions.
The concept of hearsay is simple: it is a statement by someone other than the witness that is presented to establish the truth.
The primary reason for this rule of evidence in California criminal cases is that hearsay statements are generally unreliable as evidence.
Additionally, they are not made under oath and cannot be cross-examined in court.
A typical hearsay situation occurs when a witness states that a friend told them the defendant confessed to the crime. However, the friend who supposedly made the statement does not offer any testimony.
Evidence Code 1101 EC - Character Evidence Rule
The character evidence rule bans the use of evidence about a person's character or reputation to show that they acted in line with that character on a specific occasion.
For instance, if the defendant faces trial for murder, the prosecution cannot present evidence of a violent past to establish their guilt.
This means that the prosecution cannot present your past bad actions or crimes as evidence that you committed this specific crime. Additionally, they are not permitted to call witnesses who express negative opinions about your character to establish your guilt.
However, a defendant's previous actions can be used to demonstrate patterns of habit, indicating the person's potential to commit the crime, or to suggest possible motives for the offense.
Evidence Code 1401 EC - Authentication Rule
Authentication confirms that a piece of evidence is what it claims to be. For instance, if the prosecution wants to introduce a letter as evidence, they must first demonstrate that the letter was written by the person to whom it is attributed.
Without proper authentication, the document cannot be admitted as evidence.
Evidence Code 1401 EC says, "(a) authentication of writing is required before receiving it in evidence. (b) authentication of a writing is required before secondary evidence of its content can be received in evidence."
Evidentiary Privilege Rules
Some types of information are legally protected and cannot be revealed during a criminal trial, even if they are relevant.
This is because the privilege's interests take precedence over the evidence. The most frequently invoked privileges in criminal cases include:
- Attorney-client privilege: Under Evidence Code 954, EC prohibits the use of private communications between attorneys and their clients as evidence in court.
- Spousal privilege: Under Evidence Code sections 970 and 971, the courts are prohibited from forcing spouses to testify against each other.
- Psychotherapist-patient privilege: Under Evidence Code 1014, EC prohibits court admissibility of communications between therapist and patient.
Your Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination also serves as an evidentiary privilege.
Evidence Code 352 EC - Exclusions of Evidence
Under Evidence Code 352 EC, a judge can exclude evidence that is relevant and admissible if they think it might cause confusion or mislead the jury, or if its inclusion could unfairly prejudice the defendant.
Although the judge has the discretion under this admissibility rule, an attorney can request the exclusion of specific evidence by explaining why it might be confusing, misleading, or prejudicial.
This statute states that a judge may exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of causing undue prejudice, misleading the jury, prolonging the trial, or confusing the issues.
Rules for Witness Competency
California law also provides guidelines for who can be considered a witness and whether their testimony is admissible. Specifically, witnesses must meet certain qualifications as follows:
- Under Evidence Code 701 EC, individuals must be capable of understanding and responding to questions, as well as comprehending their obligation to tell the truth.
- According to Evidence Code 702 EC, their testimony must be grounded in personal knowledge of the matter.
If witnesses do not meet these criteria, they are deemed incompetent and cannot testify at trial. Furthermore, an "expert witness" must possess specialized knowledge, experience, skills, or education relevant to an aspect of the case as outlined in Evidence Code 720 EC.
Additionally, they may only provide their opinion within their area of expertise, which can assist the jury as outlined in Evidence Code 801 EC.
In California criminal trials, it is common for one side to question the credibility of the other side's witnesses. This process is known as "impeachment of witnesses," and specific evidence rules regulate it.
Challenging Violations of Evidence Rules
If your trial prosecution presents evidence that breaches any California evidence rules, your defense lawyer will usually object to it. The judge then decides whether to sustain the objection and exclude the evidence, or to overrule it and admit it.
If the judge overrules the objection and admits the evidence, you might be able to appeal your criminal conviction. This could be based on the argument that the evidence should have been excluded, and its admission led to a miscarriage of justice.
If your defense attorneys did not object during trial, you cannot appeal solely on that ground, but you might still challenge the conviction for ineffective assistance of counsel.
If you believe evidence was wrongly excluded, you could appeal your conviction if this led to a miscarriage of justice and your attorney informed the court about its importance.
If you or a family member needs assistance with evidence in a California criminal jury trial, you should contact our office to review all the details. Cron, Israels & Stark is a top-rated criminal law firm based in Los Angeles County. Contact us for a case review.
Related Content: