Section 402. Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible; Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible

All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise limited by constitutional requirements, statute, or other provisions of the Massachusetts common law of evidence. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.

NOTE

This section is derived from Commonwealth v. DelValle, 443 Mass. 782, 793, 824 N.E.2d 830, 840 (2005), and Commonwealth v. Owen, 57 Mass. App. Ct. 538, 547, 784 N.E.2d 660, 666 (2003). Unless relevant, evidence will not be admitted because it does not make a fact in dispute more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. See Commonwealth v. Seabrooks, 425 Mass. 507, 512 n.7, 681 N.E.2d 1198, 1202 n.7 (1997). But the converse is not true, which is to say that not all relevant evidence will be admitted. See Commonwealth v. Vitello, 376 Mass. 426, 440, 381 N.E.2d 582, 590 (1978) (“all relevant evidence is admissible unless barred by an exclusionary rule”); Poirier v. Plymouth, 374 Mass. 206, 210, 372 N.E.2d 212, 218 (1978) (same).

Relevant evidence may be excluded for any number of reasons. See, e.g., G. L. c. 233, § 20 (evidence of a private conversation between spouses is inadmissible); Commonwealth v. Kater, 432 Mass. 404, 416–417, 734 N.E.2d 1164, 1176–1177 (2000) (hypnotically aided testimony is not admissible); Commonwealth v. Harris, 371 Mass. 462, 467–468, 358 N.E.2d 982, 985–986 (1976) (constitutional mandate forbids admission of a coerced confession regardless of its relevance); Commonwealth v. Kartell, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 428, 432, 790 N.E.2d 739, 743 (2003) (relevant evidence excluded on grounds it was too remote). “Alleged defects in the chain of custody usually go to the weight of the evidence and not its admissibility.” Commonwealth v. Viriyahiranpaiboon, 412 Mass. 224, 230, 588 N.E.2d 643, 648 (1992); Section 403, Grounds for Excluding Relevant Evidence (relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice, confusion, etc.). There may be circumstances where portions of documentary evidence should be excluded or redacted to protect personal privacy. See Matter of the Enforcement of a Subpoena, 436 Mass. 784, 794, 767 N.E.2d 566, 575–576 (2002).

Cross-Reference: Note “Address of Witness” to Section 501, Privileges Recognized Only as Provided.