State v. Carter
Supreme Court of Vermont
1DissentUnderwood, J.
I concede that the defendant’s blood-alcohol test of 0.21% is relevant, but without first laying a proper foundation for its admission into evidence its propensity for prejudice far outweighs its probative value. It is well recognized that otherwise admissible evidence may become inadmissible where its probative value is overwhelmed by its improper prejudicial effect. Quazzo v. Quazzo, 136 Vt. 107, 110, 386 A.2d 638, 640 (1978). We recently stated in State v. Bevins, 140 Vt. 415, 419, 439 A.2d 271, 277 (1981): “Even though relevant, evidence is still not admissible if its probative value is…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Quazzo v. QuazzoSupreme Court of Vermont · 1978
- State v. BevinsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1981
- State v. LevesqueSupreme Court of Vermont · 1974
- State v. CanerdySupreme Court of Vermont · 1974
- Duval v. DiamondstoneSupreme Court of Vermont · 1974