Fla. Stat. § 90.403 — Exclusion on grounds of prejudice or confusion

The Balancing Test: This is one of the most powerful rules of evidence. It gives the judge discretion to exclude evidence that is otherwise relevant if its negative effects are much worse than its value in proving a fact.

The Core Principle: The judge must weigh two things against each other:

1. 1. Probative Value: How much does the evidence really help prove a fact at issue?
2. 2. The Dangers: The risk that the evidence will cause one of the problems listed below.

The key phrase is "substantially outweighed." This means it's not a 50/50 balance. For the evidence to be excluded, its potential danger must be much greater than its probative value.

The Dangers Explained:

• Unfair Prejudice: The evidence might stir up the jury's emotions (like horror, anger, or sympathy) and cause them to decide the case on an emotional basis rather than on the facts. The classic example is admitting gruesome crime scene photos when the cause of death is not in dispute.
• Confusion of Issues / Misleading the Jury: The evidence might distract the jury with a side issue that isn't central to the case or might cause them to give the evidence undue weight.
• Needless Presentation of Cumulative Evidence: This is about wasting time. If a lawyer wants to call ten witnesses to all testify to the exact same minor point, the judge can exclude the later witnesses to keep the trial moving efficiently.