Opinion ID: 2203238
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Hospital Tape

Text: The hospital tape was made by a local TV station. It showed a dirty, bloody, angry, handcuffed Graham in the hospital emergency room. The prosecution's explanation of the tape's relevance is that it explains why gunshot residue tests made thereafter could fail to yield a positive result and yet appellant could have fired his gun at Officer Russell. The focus of the tape, however, is not on the hands, but on Graham himself. Seeing the defendant a short time after the murder, handcuffed, bloody, and belligerent, would have a very adverse effect on the jury. Thus, it would seem to be very prejudicial. Since the prejudice comes from the way the defendant appears and has little to do with what he did, the prejudice is very unfair. The focus of the video not being on the hands  in fact, the hands are hardly shown  the probative value of the video is questionable. Thus, this video's unfairly prejudicial content vastly outweighs its probative value and should have been excluded under Minn.R. Evid. 403. Error, by itself, however, is not enough to demand a new trial. The error must be shown to have prejudiced the defendant. State v. Link, 289 N.W.2d 102 (Minn.1979). Here, considering the great weight of evidence against Graham, it is hard to see how this video could have harmed him. Even if it were not shown, his conviction would seem almost certain. Therefore, the error was harmless.