Page:Aka v. Jefferson Hospital Association, Inc.pdf/5

Rh   that discretion, the court has rejected a carte blanche approach to the admission of photographs.
 * 1) E –  – . – With respect to photographic evidence, the supreme court requires the trial court, in making the admission determination, to consider, first, whether the relevant evidence creates a danger of unfair prejudice, and, second, whether the danger of unfair prejudice substantially outweighs its probative value.
 * 2) E –  – . – Even the most gruesome photographs may be admissible if they tend to shed light on any issue, to corroborate testimony, or if they are essential in proving a necessary element of a case, are useful to enable a witness to testify more effectively, or enable the jury to better understand the testimony; other acceptable purposes are to show the condition of the victim's bodies, the probable type or location of the injuries, and the position in which the bodies were discovered; if a photograph serves no valid purpose and could only be used to inflame the jury's passions, it should be excluded.
 * 3) E –  – . – Where an autopsy photograph was capable of authentication and previously supplied to all the parties, the supreme court concluded that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding it; the supreme court could not say that the danger of unfair prejudice outweighed the photograph's probative value; however, the supreme court determined that the trial court properly struck, on the basis of surprise, a physician's testimony concerning a laceration evident in the autopsy photograph.
 * 4) E –  – . – Where there was no evidence that appellant suffered prejudice as a result of the trial court's exclusion of testimony from a physician concerning appellee medical center's resident-training program, the supreme court affirmed the trial court on this point.
 * 5) E – . – The supreme court found no evidence of prejudice resulting from the trial court's decision to permit reference to an unlicensed doctor as "Doctor" and affirmed the trial court on the issue.
 * 6) E –  – . – Where, on cross-appeal, appellees claimed that the trial court erred by admitting a nurse's testimony concerning prior