Also known as: substantially outweigh · substantially outweighs · substantially outweighing · FRE 403 · Rule 403 balancing
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A balancing standard under which relevant evidence is excluded when its probative value is substantially outweighed by dangers such as unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. The standard appears in multiple Federal Rules of Evidence provisions that authorize exclusion or limit disclosure of otherwise admissible material. It places a heavy thumb on the scale in favor of admission unless the listed counterweights clearly predominate.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Simon Stern's counsel offers an expert who relied on police reports containing hearsay statements from absent witnesses. The reports would be inadmissible on their own. The court permits the expert to disclose the statements only after determining that their value in explaining the opinion is not substantially outweighed by the risk the jury will treat them as substantive proof.
Sofia Stern faces charges of knowingly possessing a firearm as a felon. The government seeks to introduce evidence of an earlier firearms purchase to show knowledge. The trial court admits the evidence after finding sufficient proof the prior act occurred and that its probative value on the knowledge issue is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
Sasha Stone sues a trucking company after a collision and offers more than a dozen dashcam videos of unrelated minor fleet incidents. The videos show repeated safety issues but involve different drivers and routes. The court excludes them because their limited probative value on systemic practices is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice and undue delay.
Serena Soto is prosecuted for felon-in-possession of a firearm. She offers to stipulate to her prior conviction. The government nevertheless seeks to introduce the full record naming the offense. The court excludes the details because the probative value on the status element is substantially outweighed by the unfair prejudice arising from the name and nature of the conviction.
Spencer Silver testifies in a civil contract dispute. The opposing party offers a twelve-year-old conviction for falsifying expense vouchers. The proponent supplies specific facts showing the conviction's bearing on credibility. The court admits the conviction only after finding that its probative value, supported by those facts, substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect.
Stella Shapiro is charged with unlawful firearm possession. The government offers evidence of two earlier encounters in which officers found firearms in her vehicle. The court admits the evidence after determining that its probative value on knowledge is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice and issues a limiting instruction.
The court must determine that the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by one or more of the enumerated dangers such as unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or undue delay. The standard is weighted in favor of admission. Evidence is excluded only when the counterweights clearly predominate over probative value.
Yes. Under Rule 703 an expert may disclose inadmissible facts or data only if their probative value in helping the jury evaluate the opinion substantially outweighs their prejudicial effect. The court performs the balancing before permitting disclosure to the jury.
…admissible in evidence.” [^maj-2]: But disclosure of these facts or data to the jury is permitted if the value of disclosure “substantially outweighs [any] prejudicial effect,” Fed. Rule Evid. 703, or “the probative value . . . outweighs the risk of unfair prejudice.” People v. Pasch , 152 Ill. 2d 133, 223, 604 N. E. 2d 294, 333 (1992).…
…scope of a trial judge's discretion under Rule 403, which authorizes exclusion of relevant evidence when its "probative value is substantially outweighed
…was a firearm. The court found that the evidence was relevant to the issue of knowledge and that its probative value was not substantially outweighed
…provide otherwise. Rule 403 allows the trial judge to exclude relevant evidence if, among other things, “its probative value is
…to prove an element of the offense; (3) the evidence must be reliable; and (4) the probative value of the evidence must not be substantially outweighed
For convictions more than ten years old the proponent must show that the probative value, supported by specific facts and circumstances, substantially outweighs the prejudicial effect. The rule also requires reasonable written notice to the adverse party.
The court weighs the marginal probative value of the full record against the unfair prejudice that flows from revealing the name and nature of the conviction. When the stipulation removes any need for details, the risk of prejudice often substantially outweighs the remaining probative value.
Yes. After the court finds sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude the prior act occurred, it must still determine that the probative value on a non-propensity issue is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.