Opinion ID: 2823794
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: General Evidentiary Limits on the Constitutional Right to Present a Defense

Text: Â¶26Â Â Â Â Â Â Â âWhether rooted directly in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or in the Compulsory Process or Confrontation Clauses of the SixthÂ Amendment, the Constitution guarantees criminal defendants a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.â Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319, 324 (2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also People v. Salazar, 2012 CO 20, Â¶ 17, 272 P.3d 1067, 1071. Put differently, a criminal defendant is entitled to all reasonable opportunities to present evidence that might tend to create doubt as to the defendantâs guilt. See People v. Bueno, 626 P.2d 1167, 1169 (Colo. App. 1981). Â¶27Â Â Â Â Â Â Â However, the right to present a defense is generally subject to, and constrained by, familiar and well-established limits on the admissibility of evidence. As a fundamental matter, evidence must be relevant to be admissible. CRE 402. Relevant evidence is evidence âhaving any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.â CRE 401. And even relevant evidence may be excluded âif its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.â CRE 403.