Also known as: FRE 104(b) · Fed. R. Evid. 104(b) · Rule 104b · conditional relevance · preliminary questions of fact
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A rule providing that when the relevance of evidence depends on whether a fact exists, the court admits the evidence if proof is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact exists. The court performs only a screening function and leaves the ultimate determination of the conditioning fact to the jury.
Ruby Rivera is charged with embezzling charitable funds. The prosecution offers invoices from her prior role at a youth nonprofit to show a common plan. The invoices are relevant only if the jury finds she performed no services there. The court admits the invoices after the prosecution shows board minutes sufficient for a reasonable juror to find the prior act occurred.
Ralph Richardson is tried for conspiracy to distribute drugs. The government offers a recorded call in which an alleged coconspirator implicates him. The call is relevant only if the jury finds a conspiracy existed and Richardson joined it. The court admits the recording after the government presents testimony sufficient for a reasonable juror to find the conditioning facts.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Renee Rogers faces murder charges after giving a statement to police. The defense claims the confession was involuntary. The statement is relevant only if the jury finds it was made freely. The court screens the evidence and admits the confession after the prosecution offers testimony sufficient for a reasonable juror to find voluntariness.
Ronald Reed is prosecuted for robbery. The state offers his stationhouse confession. The confession is relevant only if the jury finds it was not coerced. The court admits the confession after the prosecution produces evidence sufficient for a reasonable juror to conclude the statement was voluntary.
Rita Russell seeks production of documents in a tax dispute. The government claims attorney-client privilege. The documents are relevant only if the jury finds they fall outside the crime-fraud exception. The court admits the documents after the government offers evidence sufficient for a reasonable juror to find the exception applies.
The judge asks only whether the proponent has introduced evidence sufficient to support a finding by a reasonable juror that the conditioning fact exists. The judge does not decide the fact herself or apply a preponderance standard.
Supporting sources
Rule 104(a) requires the judge to decide preliminary questions such as witness qualification or privilege for herself. Rule 104(b) requires the judge only to screen whether a reasonable jury could find the conditioning fact. The jury then decides the fact.
Supporting sources
Yes. The rule expressly permits the court to admit the evidence on the condition that the connecting proof be introduced later. If the proponent fails to supply the link, the court may strike the evidence or instruct the jury to disregard it.
Supporting sources
The evidence loses its relevance and the jury must disregard it. The judge may also strike the evidence or give a limiting instruction after the trial record is complete.
Supporting sources
…by the court." Petitioner and the Government agree that the existence of a conspiracy and petitioner's involvement in it are preliminary questions of fact that, under Rule 104, must be resolved by the court. The Federal Rules, however, nowhere define the standard of proof the court must observe in resolving these questions. We are therefore…