Okla. Stat. » Title 12 — CIVIL PROCEDURE
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2403 (2026)

Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice,

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

confusion or cumulative nature of evidence. Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, needless presentation of cumulative evidence, or unfair and harmful surprise. However, in a prosecution for any criminal homicide, an appropriate photograph of the victim while alive shall be admissible evidence when offered by the district attorney to show the general appearance and condition of the victim while alive. Added by Laws 1978, c. 285, § 403, eff. Oct. 1, 1978. Amended by Laws 2002, c. 468, § 30, eff. Nov. 1, 2002; Laws 2003, c. 3, § 15, emerg. eff. March 19, 2003. NOTE: Laws 2002, c. 128, § 1 repealed by Laws 2003, c. 3, § 16, emerg. eff. March 19, 2003.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 257 cases (20 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Hogan v. State, 2006 OK CR 19 (Okla. Crim. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hogan v. State, 2006 OK CR 19 (Okla. Crim. App. 2006). · cites it 6× “In 2002, the Legislature amended 12 O.S. § 2403, permitting the admission in a prosecution for any criminal homicide of an appropriate photograph of the victim while alive when offered by the district attorney to show the general appearance and condition of the victim while…”
Grant v. State, 2009 OK CR 11 (Okla. Crim. App. 2009). · cites it 8× “12 O.S.2001, § 2403; Hancock v. State, 2007 OK CR 9, ¶ 97 , 155 *20 P.”
Goode v. State, 2010 OK CR 10 (Okla. Crim. App. 2010). · cites it 8× “See 12 O.S.Supp.2003, § 2403. [10] Furthermore, we find that the admission of this tape did not improperly bolster Chastain's testimony.”
James v. State, 2009 OK CR 8 (Okla. Crim. App. 2009). · cites it 9× “While these provisions are perhaps not models of legislative clarity, we construe the language found in both as still requiring the trial court to balance the probative value of the proffered evidence against any unfairly prejudicial effect, pursuant to 12 O.S.2001, § 2403. ¶ 8…”
Bench v. State, 2018 OK CR 31 (Okla. Crim. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “" 12 O.S.2011, § 2403. Where there is duplication in images, the appellant has the burden to show that the repetition in images was needless or inflammatory.”
Tafolla v. State, 2019 OK CR 15 (Okla. Crim. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “12 O.S.2011, § 2403. The introduction of this evidence was not error, plain or otherwise.”
Postelle v. State, 267 P.3d 114 (Okla. Crim. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “Other witness testimony placed Postelle and his brother in the same van shortly before and after the murders with the murder weapons.”
In the Matter of K. H., 2021 OK 33 (Okla. 2021). · cites it 6× “" 12 O.S.2011 § 2403. "Probative value refers to or means the tendency of evidence to establish the proposition that it is offered to prove.”
Andrew v. State, 2007 OK CR 23 (Okla. Crim. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “See 12 O.S.Supp.2002, § 2403. Again, introduction is judged under an abuse of discretion standard.”
Hooks v. Workman, 689 F.3d 1148 (10th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “Based on our independent review of the record, we conclude that the OCCA committed no error. At best, Mr. Hooks’s arguments amount to disagreement with the OCCA -47- concerning the relevance and prejudicial effect of the evidence, but we are not persuaded that the OCCA was wrong.”
Hammick v. State, 2019 OK CR 21 (Okla. Crim. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “3d at 936--37; 12 O.S.2011, § 2403. The Court gives proposed evidence its maximum reasonable probative force and its minimum reasonable prejudicial value.”
Gillioms v. State, 2022 OK CR 3 (Okla. Crim. App. 2022). · cites it 4× “See 12 O.S.2011, § 2403 ¶33 The other challenged evidence involves testimony relating to field interviews between Oklahoma City Police Officers and Appellant in which Appellant was identified as a member of the Neighborhood Crips (NHC) gang and had tattoos that meant "Hoover…”
Show all 257 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.