How do relevance and 403 balancing affect admissibility?

• A. Evidence must be relevant to be admissible, but it may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by risks like unfair prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.
• B. All relevant evidence is admissible with no exceptions.
• C. Irrelevant evidence is admissible if it is entertaining.
• D. Relevant evidence can always be admitted even if prejudicial.

Answer: (C)

Relevance is the starting point for admissibility: evidence must have some tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable. But even if something is relevant, it can still be kept out. The balancing under Rule 403 weighs the evidence’s probative value against the dangers of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or unnecessary waste of time. If the potential prejudice or confusion substantially outweighs the usefulness of the information for proving a point, the judge can exclude it. This keeps the jury focused on probative facts rather than emotional impact or distraction. So, the admissibility hinges on relevance plus a favorable 403 balance.