Also known as: Federal Rule of Evidence 402 · Fed. R. Evid. 402 · Rule 402 · FRE402
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A rule of evidence stating that relevant evidence is admissible and irrelevant evidence is inadmissible unless the Constitution, a federal statute, these rules, or other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court provide otherwise.
Flora Ford sued Fulton Shipping after a cargo mishap. More than thirty days before trial the parties exchanged pretrial disclosures. Fulton Shipping failed to object within fourteen days to a dashcam clip that showed only routine port activity unrelated to the mishap. At the final conference Fulton Shipping raised a relevance objection. The court permitted the objection because it rested on FRE 402.
Freya Freeman testified for the prosecution against Fernando Farrell. Defense counsel sought to introduce proof that Freeman belonged to the same gang as the defendant and therefore had a motive to lie. The evidence made Freeman's credibility less probable and therefore satisfied the threshold for admission.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Francisco Frost faced a felon-in-possession charge. The government offered the full judgment of his earlier robbery conviction. Frost offered to stipulate to the fact of conviction. The court evaluated whether the extra details made any fact of consequence more probable beyond what the stipulation already established.
Francesca Fiore sued Foxfire Biotech claiming its drug caused birth defects. The company proffered expert testimony that epidemiological studies showed no causal link. The court assessed whether the studies made the fact of causation more or less probable under the governing standard.
Floyd Franklin was charged with receiving stolen televisions. The government introduced evidence that Franklin had previously sold other stolen merchandise obtained from the same supplier. The court considered whether the prior transactions made it more probable that Franklin knew the televisions were stolen.
Fusion Power employees were prosecuted for distributing videos depicting animal cruelty. The government offered the videos to prove the conduct satisfied an element of the offense. The court examined whether the footage made any fact of consequence in the statutory definition more probable.
Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable. Relevant evidence is admissible unless another rule or constitutional provision excludes it. Irrelevant evidence is never admissible.
No. A demonstrative aid must still be tethered to a fact of consequence. A generic marketing reel offered only to evoke emotion fails the test even if vivid.
Objections based on FRE 402 may be raised at trial even if not listed within the fourteen-day window. All other objections to deposition designations and exhibits are waived absent good cause.
No. A parking ticket issued months earlier does not tend to prove or disprove whether brakes were defective or properly repaired. Such evidence fails the relevance threshold.
When relevance depends on a preliminary fact, the proponent must introduce evidence sufficient for a reasonable jury to find that fact exists. The assistant's remark about cracked bats satisfied this standard because the assistant handled the equipment during the season.
…Court concludes that reliability and relevancy are the touchstones of the admissibility of expert testimony. Ante , at 590-592. Federal Rule of Evidence 402 provides, as the Court points out, that “[e]vidence which is not relevant is not admissible.” But there is no similar reference in the Rule to “reliability.” The Court constructs its…