In limine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Motion in limine (Latin: "at the threshold") is a motion, made before the start of a trial requesting that the judge rule that certain evidence may, or may not, be introduced to the jury in a trial. This is done in judge's chambers, out of hearing of the jury. If a question is to be decided in limine, it will be for the judge to decide. Usually it is used to shield the jury from possibly inadmissible and harmful evidence.

[edit] Example

For example, the defendant may ask the judge to refuse to admit into evidence personal medical, criminal or financial records if these records are irrelevant, if the probative value is outweighed by the prejudicial value, or if admittance would violate a rule of evidence. If the motion is granted, then evidence regarding the excluded records would be prohibited from being presented without specific approval from the judge at the time the party wants to offer the evidence. Normally, when a party wants to offer the evidence that was addressed by the motion in limine, the attorney will ask for a discussion with the judge at the bench, outside of the hearing of the jury. Then, in the context of the evidence already heard, the judge will decide whether or not the evidence is relevant and should be admitted in trial. Therefore, a motion in limine is not a strict prohibition on certain evidence, but merely a requirement that a party approach the judge for permission before introducing the evidence. This prevents a party from committing what some attorneys call "letting a skunk loose in the courtroom" before the other party's attorney has time to object.

The party seeking to exclude evidence with a motion in limine should be mindful of the scope of the relief sought. Judges are reluctant to exclude broad categories of evidence but will be more likely to consider a narrow request to exclude evidence.

If the motion is granted and the opposing party fails to obey, the judge may order a mistrial or impose sanctions on the offending party.

A problem arises if the motion in limine is granted to the prosecution to exclude evidence needed by the defense to prove its case. See Davidian trial, in which the bench denied the defense the right to present evidence of misconduct by the federal agents who conducted the siege, evidence that if presented would likely have brought acquittals of all defendants. The original standard of due process was that in criminal cases motions in limine could be granted only to the defense.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Governing laws

In the U.S., most motions in limine in federal courts are governed by the Federal Rules of Evidence. Some others arise under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to comply with discovery.