Opinion ID: 2519883
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Exclusion from Evidence of Magazine Found at the Scene of Bell's Abduction

Text: Lastly, Bell argues the trial court erred when it refused to admit Ex. P-149B, the magazine discovered at the scene of her abduction. Most of Bell's arguments with respect to the magazine are focused on its authenticity under ER 901. As such, they are premised on the assumption the magazine is relevant in the first place. But the trial court excluded the magazine on relevancy grounds, not authenticity. THE COURT: .... [T]he basic premise that this material was found on the road simply does not have the requisite identity with Mr. Scherf. And I don't mean identity in terms of criminal proof of identity. I just simply can't draw the conclusion based on there is no evidence that he in any other context used this particular magazine. There is no other evidence of anyone seeing the magazine in the vehicle, there is no evidence of anyone seeing the magazine fall out of his vehicle and just its sheer presence on a road is not enough to satisfy the requirements of Rule 401 with regard to minimal relevancy. . . . . THE COURT: Let the record show that the Court has now ruled that the document that was found on the road was not relevant, and even if relevant is outweighed by 403 prejudice. RP at 385-87. The threshold issue for admission of any evidence is relevancy. Only relevant evidence is admissible. ER 402. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make the existence of any fact of consequence more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. State v. Darden, 145 Wash.2d 612, 624, 41 P.3d 1189 (2002) (citing ER 401). Even if relevant, however, evidence may still be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice, confusion, or undue delay. ER 403. A trial court's relevancy determinations, including its balancing of probative value against unfair prejudicial effects, are generally reviewed for manifest abuse of discretion. State v. Russell, 125 Wash.2d 24, 78, 882 P.2d 747 (1994). [10] Although the threshold for relevancy is low, Darden, 145 Wash.2d at 621, 41 P.3d 1189, the magazine found at the scene of Bell's abduction cannot reach even that level. It was not established as Scherf's magazine; at most it is a magazine that might have been possessed by Scherf. To be relevant, evidence need not establish the proponents' case or theory in and of itself, but it must be at least a piece of the puzzle. Because the magazine found at the scene of Bell's abduction was not connected to Scherf, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to admit it. [11]