What does Rule 402 state about the admissibility of relevant evidence?

• A. Relevant evidence is admissible unless excluded by law.
• B. Relevant evidence is always admissible in every case.
• C. Irrelevant evidence is admissible if it supports a party's theory.
• D. All evidence is admissible if probative value is high.

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is that evidence which is relevant is allowed in court unless a rule or law says otherwise. Rule 402 gives a default of admissibility for relevant evidence, but that default isn’t absolute—there are exclusions and limitations built into the system. For example, even if something is relevant, it can be kept out if a specific rule says it’s not admissible (such as privileges, or certain hearsay rules that have no applicable exception). Additionally, relevance isn’t the only test; Rule 403 allows the judge to exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by risks like unfair prejudice, confusion, or wasting time. So the correct idea is that relevant evidence is admissible unless excluded by law, rather than being automatically admissible in every case, or allowing all evidence based on probative value or irrelevance.