A defendant is on trial for burglary. During the trial, the prosecution seeks to introduce evidence that the defendant, six months before the alleged burglary, purchased a specialized lock-picking tool. The defense objects to the introduction of this evidence, arguing that it is not relevant. How should the court rule?
The court should admit the evidence because it makes it more probable that the defendant committed the burglary.
The court should exclude the evidence because owning a lock-picking tool is not illegal and poses a risk of unfair prejudice against the defendant.
The court should admit the evidence but provide a limiting instruction to the jury regarding its use.
The court should exclude the evidence because it occurred six months prior to the alleged crime, making it too remote in time to be relevant.
The evidence of the defendant purchasing a lock-picking tool is relevant because it has a tendency to make the fact that the defendant participated in the burglary more probable. Relevancy is evaluated under Rule 401, which requires evidence to be probative to any fact of consequence in the case. Although the transaction happened six months prior, its temporal distance does not automatically make it irrelevant. The appropriate consideration is whether its probative value substantially outweighs the risk of unfair prejudice or confusion. Admitting this evidence is consistent with these principles, as it is relevant to showing potential preparation or capacity for committing the crime. Similar answers might seem correct but fail to properly account for the balancing test of admissibility under Rule 403 and the broad definition of relevancy.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is Rule 401 regarding evidence relevance?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Can the temporal distance of evidence affect its relevance?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is Rule 403 and how does it relate to admissibility of evidence?