Whether the prejudicial value outweighs the probative value is pretty much a subjective call on the part of the trial court judge, and will only be reviewed for an abuse of discretion standard.
If Florida follows the Federal Rules of Evidence, they probably have something like this:
Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes
(a) Character Evidence Generally. Evidence of a person’s character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except:
(1) Character of accused. Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same;
(2) Character of victim. Evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor;
(3) Character of witness. Evidence of the character of a witness, as provided in Rules 607, 608 and 609.
(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the court excuses pre-trial notice on good cause shown, of the general nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial.
As pointed out, if the prosecution offers ANY evidence that “Trayvon was a good boy” I think the gun photos and the “universal gesture of disapproval” photos come into evidence. In fact, it will be very difficult for the prosecutor to avoid it.
I cannot see under any circumstances how the pot plants come into evidence.
I cannot see under any circumstances how the pot plants come into evidence.
If I remember the toxicology report showed levels of THC in the blood showing recent usage and Byproducts of THC that showed a continual usage pattern.
Pretty much...the evidence the defense presented may come in on rebuttal...correct?
(been a few yes since my JAG days)
You don't think it can come in if the prosecutor enters into evidence the NEN call during which Zimmerman is heard to say that this guy looks to be "on drugs" ???