evidence rules

establishes relevance

relevant evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise:the United States Constitution; a federal statute; these rules; or other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court. irrelevant evidence is not admissible

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.

A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

An expert may base an opinion on facts or data in the case that the expert has been made aware of or personally observed.