Legal Memorandum: Grounds for exclusion of relevant evidence

Issue: Under the Illinois Rules of Evidence, what are the grounds for excluding relevant evidence?

Illinois Rule 403 provides for the exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.  

Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

Ill. R. Evid. 403 (2015).

In State v. Ward, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding acquittal evidence:

[O]nce other-crimes evidence has been allowed, the defendant’s proffered rebuttal evidence is subject to the generally applicable rules of evidence. Under the generally applicable balancing test, proffered evidence, if relevant and otherwise admissible, is to be admitted unless its "probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence." Ill. R. Evid. 403 (eff. Jan. 1, 2011). Under this rule, the party urging admission of the evidence does not argue prejudice if it is not admitted–he argues that the evidence is highly probative in his favor. The party opposing admission of the evidence argues unfair prejudice to his case, confusion of the issues, or other Rule 403 considerations.

Illinois v. Ward, Docket No. 108690, 2011.IL.0000340 at ¶ 123 (Ill. 2011).

And in People v. Watkins, the trial court did not […]