What Is Considered Inadmissible Evidence?

In highly publicized trials, every piece of evidence presented by the prosecution or defense is a surprise to the readers or the television audience. You might wonder how, in the video footage or the courtroom sketches, the judge sits expressionless. Perhaps a flawless poker face is part of the judge’s job description; maybe this is where we get the expression “sober as a judge.” In fact, the trial is a performance. The prosecution and defense are not showing any exhibits or asking witnesses any questions that the judge has not seen or heard before. As with any performance, it is the result of a long process of rehearsals and negotiations. The jury only sees each element of the show because the judge has specifically authorized it. If a judge allows the prosecution to present a piece of evidence in violation of the law and against the interests of justice, and this results in the jury convicting the defendant, the defendant has the right to appeal the conviction. Furthermore, while the case is pending, the judge can declare a mistrial if the jury hears inadmissible evidence. Here, our Miami criminal defense lawyer explains what kinds of evidence are inadmissible at trial and what to do if the prosecution presents inadmissible evidence in your case.

Deciding Which Evidence the Jury Gets to Hear Is an Important Part of the Criminal Process

When a defendant in a criminal case pleads not guilty, the court must promptly schedule a trial, pursuant to the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a fair trial, which necessitates that the state not make the defendant wait excessively to find out whether the court has found him or her innocent or guilty. Between the plea and the trial is the pretrial discovery phase. During this phase, the prosecution and defense disclose to each other the evidence that they plan to present at the trial. This gives each side the opportunity to formulate counterarguments and cross-examination questions in response to the other side’s evidence. If the prosecution withholds evidence that the defense could plausibly use to cast doubt on the defendant’s guilt, and the defendant discovers this only after the jury has convicted him or her, the defendant has the right to appeal the conviction based on this.

During the pretrial discovery phase, each side also has the opportunity to raise objections about the admissibility of the other side’s evidence. If your or your lawyer thinks that a piece of prosecution evidence is inadmissible, then your lawyer can file a motion in court, asking the judge to rule on whether the prosecution may show the evidence to the jury.

Evidence Obtained Illegally

One of the most common reasons for excluding evidence from a trial is if the state obtained the evidence illegally. For example, evidence that police seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment, that is, without a warrant or probable cause, is inadmissible. In many cases involving drugs, the evidence seized during a traffic stop or a search of a defendant’s residence is the centerpiece of the prosecution’s case against the defendant, and if the judge rules this evidence inadmissible, then the prosecution’s case quickly falls apart, and the court must dismiss the charges against the defendant.

Hearsay Evidence

Hearsay evidence, where a witness quotes statements that someone else said, is not usually admissible. Common law considers it too difficult to verify and usually irrelevant and prejudicial. Exceptions to the rule about hearsay evidence exist, though. If a child who witnessed a crime spoke to an adult about it shortly afterward, the court will usually summon the adult to present the evidence, in the interest of not asking a child to testify in court. Asking children to testify causes them undue stress, and they are often too nervous to provide reliable testimony, and there is too much risk that adults will influence the child witness about what to say.

Character Evidence and Other Irrelevant Evidence

Either side has the right to exclude evidence on the grounds that it is irrelevant. Irrelevant evidence includes, but is not limited to, evidence about a defendant’s moral character. This evidence may be admissible if the defense introduces it and the prosecutors cross examine a defense witness who speaks about the defendant’s character. The prosecution cannot be the first to attempt to persuade the jury of the defendant’s guilt based on statements about the defendant’s character.

Contact Our Criminal Defense Attorneys

A South Florida criminal defense lawyer can help you defend yourself by including exculpatory evidence and by excluding unfair evidence.  Contact Ratzan & Faccidomo in Miami, Florida for a confidential consultation about your case.

Source:

law.cornell.edu/wex/character_evidence#:~:text=Currently%2C%20in%20federal%20court%20%2C%20Federal,the%20alleged%20victim’s%20trait%20of