Opinion ID: 2056099
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Photograph of the Crime Scene

Text: [¶ 22] Prior to trial, Dwyer moved in limine to bar the State from seeking to admit certain photographs of the victim. One photograph, taken at the time her body was discovered, shows some of the excavation work at the burial site and three of her toes visibly protruding from the ground. It was admitted at trial over Dwyer's objection. Dwyer argues that the photo should have been excluded pursuant to M.R. Evid. 403, which states: Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. [¶ 23] We review the admission of photographic evidence for an abuse of discretion. Bickart, 2009 ME 7, ¶ 36, 963 A.2d at 193. A photograph is admissible under Rule 403 if it truly and accurately depicts what it purports to represent, is relevant to some issue involved in the litigation, and its probative value is not outweighed by any tendency it may have toward unfair prejudice. Id. (quotation marks omitted). The guiding principle is that all relevant evidence should be admitted unless any prejudice overwhelms any potentially probative value. Id. ¶ 39, 963 A.2d at 193. [¶ 24] The State explained in limine that it sought to admit the photo because it showed the effort Dwyer exerted in burying the victim, and thus was relevant to the intentional or knowing state of mind it was required to prove on the murder charge. The State chose not to seek admission of other, more potentially prejudicial photos that showed more of the victim's body. [¶ 25] As we observed in Bickart, [c]riminal juries are frequently required to consider photographic evidence that depicts gruesome, abhorrent or shocking images. 2009 ME 7, ¶ 40, 963 A.2d at 194. Even photographs meeting that description may be sufficiently relevant to outweigh any prejudice. Here, while the actual image of the photograph at issue and the mental image it suggests are disturbing, the photograph is not gruesome, abhorrent, or shocking. Because the photograph was relevant evidence, and its relevance was not outweighed by a tendency toward unfair prejudice, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the photograph.