FRE Rule 103
Rulings on Evidence
Today we’re discussing the basics of rulings on evidence as outlined in FRE 103.
Rule 103 - Rulings on Evidence reads as follows:
Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence
(a) Preserving a Claim of Error. A party may claim error in a ruling to admit or exclude evidence only if the error affects a substantial right of the party and:
(1) if the ruling admits evidence, a party, on the record:
(A) timely objects or moves to strike; and
(B) states the specific ground, unless it was apparent from the context; or
(2) if the ruling excludes evidence, a party informs the court of its substance by an offer of proof, unless the substance was apparent from the context.
(b) Not Needing to Renew an Objection or Offer of Proof. Once the court rules definitively on the record — either before or at trial — a party need not renew an objection or offer of proof to preserve a claim of error for appeal.
(c) Court’s Statement About the Ruling; Directing an Offer of Proof. The court may make any statement about the character or form of the evidence, the objection made, and the ruling. The court may direct that an offer of proof be made in question-and-answer form.
(d) Preventing the Jury from Hearing Inadmissible Evidence. To the extent practicable, the court must conduct a jury trial so that inadmissible evidence is not suggested to the jury by any means.
(e) Taking Notice of Plain Error. A court may take notice of a plain error affecting a substantial right, even if the claim of error was not properly preserved.
Now, of course, it is your job as an attorney or a law student to determine precisely what all that means. Let’s put it into plain English together:
Federal Rule of Evidence 103 in Plain English
(a) How to Preserve Your Right to Complain About Evidence on Appeal
You can only challenge a judge's evidence ruling on appeal if:
The ruling seriously (substantially) affected your case, and
You followed the following procedures:
When evidence is ADMITTED that you think should be EXCLUDED:
Object right away or move to strike
Clearly state why it's objectionable (unless the reason is patently obvious)
Make sure your objection is recorded
When evidence is EXCLUDED that you think should be ADMITTED:
Tell the judge what the evidence would have shown (called an "offer of proof")
This isn't necessary if it was already clear what the evidence would have shown
(b) When You Don't Need to Object Again
If the judge makes a definite ruling on the record (either before or during trial), you don't have to keep objecting to the same issue to preserve your right to appeal.
(c) The Judge's Role in Clarifying Rulings
The judge can:
Make statements explaining the ruling and the evidence involved
Require that offers of proof be presented in a question-and-answer format
(d) Keeping Inadmissible Evidence from the Jury
The judge must take practical steps to prevent the jury from being exposed to evidence that has been ruled inadmissible.
(e) The Plain Error Safety Net
Even if you didn't properly object, the court can still recognize and correct a "plain error" (an obvious, serious mistake) that substantially affected someone's rights.
What does all this mean in practice?
Speak up or lose your right to complain later: If you don't object to bad evidence coming in (or make an offer of proof for good evidence kept out), you generally can't raise the issue on appeal. There is a real risk of use it or lose it.
Be specific: Vague objections like "I object!" aren't enough. You need to specify the rule or reason (e.g., "Objection, hearsay" or "Objection, lacks foundation"). Of course, you need to do this usually without using speaking objections so learn the rule numbers or at least the names.
Make the record: Ensure your objections and the judge's rulings are properly recorded for the appeal court to review.
One clear ruling is enough: Once the judge definitely rules on an evidence issue, you don't need to keep objecting to preserve your appeal rights.
Make offers of proof useful: When showing what excluded evidence would have proven, be specific enough that an appeals court can understand its importance.
Plain error is rare: Don't count on the "plain error" provision to save you - it's only for exceptional circumstances where a serious injustice would otherwise occur.