Opinion ID: 1120029
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the complaining witness' grades and school absences

Text: Alexander also contends that the superior court erred by granting a protective order suppressing two defense exhibits consisting of a school transcript and a handwritten absentee synopsis. Alexander argues that this demonstrative evidence corroborates the basis for A.F.'s mother's anger and is relevant to the defense that A.F. and her friends fabricated the rape to placate the mother's wrath. While we agree that the evidence was relevant, [19] we find no error in its exclusion. In so finding, we emphasize that a trial court's evidentiary rulings are reviewed to determine whether an abuse of discretion occurred. [20] From the testimony presented, the jury was aware of A.F.'s poor grades, her excessive absenteeism and her mother's anger. [21] Thus, Alexander was not prevented from presenting his fabrication defense. Alaska Rule of Evidence 403 provides: Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is 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. We find that this evidence could properly have been excluded as cumulative and that there was no abuse of discretion on the superior court's part in excluding it.