Rule 403. Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, confusion, Waste of Time, or other Reasons
The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, confusion, or Waste of Time
Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially 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.
IRE 403 is identical to the federal rule before the latter's amendment solely for stylistic purposes effective December 1, 2011. See Gill v. Foster, 157 Ill. 2d 304, 313 (1993), where in a case substantially predating adoption of codified evidence rules in Illinois and without citing FRE 403, the supreme court applied principles provided in the rule in reviewing the trial court's ruling on admission of evidence. Note that the rule allows the exclusion of relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by one or more of the dangers it lists. The rule overlays all other evidentiary rules. The test for exclusion of relevant evidence provided by the rule is frequently referred to as the "Rule 403 balancing test."
Probably the most...
