547 U.S. 319 (2006)
- The Court held that under the rule applied by the South Carolina Supreme Court, the trial judge did not focus on the probative value or the potential adverse effects of admitting the defense evidence of third-party guilt.
- Instead, the critical inquiry concerned the strength of the prosecution's case; if the prosecution's case was strong enough, the evidence of third-party guilt was excluded even if that evidence, if viewed independently, would have had great probative value and even if it would not have posed an undue risk of harassment, prejudice, or confusion of the issues.
- Furthermore, the rule seemed to call for little, if any, examination of the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses or the reliability of its evidence.
- The Court held that the rule did not rationally serve the end that the Gregory rule was designed to promote, i.e., to focus the trial on the central issues by excluding evidence that had only a very weak logical connection to the central issues.
- Nor had the State identified any other legitimate end that the rule served.
- Therefore, the rule as applied in the case violated defendant's right to have a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.
The judgment of the South Carolina Supreme Court was vacated and the case was remanded for further proceedings.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.