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, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits
Rule 403. Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, or Other Reasons
Effective January 1, 2014
Opinions in this dataset that cite Rule 403
40 opinions in the dataset cite this rule, reversals first. Matched from each opinion’s coded issue, not from a reading of the opinion.
Reporter citations are as supplied and unverified; the official opinion link is the source of record.
- In re Trust of B. Alice McCoy282 N.E.3d 495 unverifiedError — reversibleOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Morgan v. State277 N.E.3d 561 unverifiedError — reversibleOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- A.A. v. Cmty. Health Network267 N.E.3d 1005 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Adams v. State278 N.E.3d 1259 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Barbee v. State269 N.E.3d 888 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Belcher v. State270 N.E.3d 525 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Blair v. State272 N.E.3d 970 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Boykin v. State277 N.E.3d 576 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Burks v. State267 N.E.3d 1109 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Childs v. State274 N.E.3d 216 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Ervin v. State277 N.E.3d 1271 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Haynes v. State282 N.E.3d 141 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Kimbrough v. State266 N.E.3d 1288 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Polk v. State271 N.E.3d 151 unverifiedError — harmlessOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Addison v. State282 N.E.3d 1080 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Bloch v. State272 N.E.3d 1006 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Briscoe v. State278 N.E.3d 1259 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Campbell v. State266 N.E.3d 270 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Club Newtone, Inc. v. Gillaspy271 N.E.3d 597 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Currin v. State278 N.E.3d 1287 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Ehr v. State274 N.E.3d 175 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Gordon v. State267 N.E.3d 1111 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Habegger v. State278 N.E.3d 1254 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Hawkins v. State277 N.E.3d 557 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Hinson v. State282 N.E.3d 1103 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Hodson v. State272 N.E.3d 971 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Hoover v. State282 N.E.3d 1069 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Justice v. Oak Haven Stables275 N.E.3d 11 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Moore v. State266 N.E.3d 247 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Moore v. State282 N.E.3d 121 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Nailon v. State268 N.E.3d 865 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Nour v. State274 N.E.3d 145 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Percifield v. State277 N.E.3d 580 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Robertson v. State274 N.E.3d 167 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Robinson v. State282 N.E.3d 142 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Scott v. State268 N.E.3d 864 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Searcy v. State279 N.E.3d 393 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Syed v. State270 N.E.3d 479 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Tandy v. State273 N.E.3d 1148 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
- Tate v. State266 N.E.3d 300 unverifiedAffirmed — no errorOn the heat mapOfficial opinion ↗
← Rule 402
General Admissibility of Relevant EvidenceRule 404 →
Character Evidence; Crimes or Other Acts
General Admissibility of Relevant EvidenceRule 404 →
Character Evidence; Crimes or Other Acts
Source: the Indiana Rules of Evidence, reproduced for browsing. Rule text as supplied, including the amendment to Rule 103(b) effective July 1, 2026 (Order, Cause No. 26S-MS-8); other rules carry their own effective dates. This is an unofficial copy; check the official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.