Court Opinion

ID: 9469725
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 02:47:34.196641+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:41:32.047870
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
In response to plaintiff’s contention on rehearing that the balancing test of Rule 403, Federal Rules of Evidence, was invoked by a motion in limine denied by the trial court and therefore need not have been reasserted in a contemporaneous objection, we have reexamined the record. Assuming, without deciding, that such a motion might be sufficient for such purposes, this one is not. At one spot it asserts that evidence of events occurring before the arrival of defendant Spencer on the scene was irrelevant and at another that it was prejudicial, but nowhere does it assert any relationship between these concepts of relevance and prejudice or call on the court to balance relevance and probative value against prejudice.
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for rehearing, filed in the above entitled and numbered cause be and the same is hereby DENIED.