The Commonwealth always has the burden of proof in a criminal case. And to meet that burden, the Commonwealth needs evidence. Depending on the circumstances, your attorney may win your case even before your trial begins by limiting the evidence that the Commonwealth can present against you. You may be familiar with motions to suppress evidence, which challenge evidence that the police obtained in violation of your constitutional rights. This may include physical evidence, your statement, or an eyewitness identification.

Another important way to limit the evidence is through a Motion in Limine, which seeks to exclude evidence that is not admissible according to the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence. Some examples of evidence that is generally not admissible include:

• Evidence that is not relevant because it does not tend to prove or disprove any of the facts that are at issue in the trial;
• Evidence that is unfairly prejudicial;
• Evidence of prior criminal convictions;
• Testimony by a witness who has no personal knowledge of the matters he or she would testify about;
• Most opinions by witnesses who are not recognized by the court as expert witnesses;
• Hearsay, which is a statement made outside of court and offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement;
• Evidence that is not authenticated by some reliable means.

In many cases, the prosecution and defense will not agree on whether certain evidence is admissible and will battle it out during pre-trial motions. Cases can be won or lost at this stage, so it is important to have an attorney who knows the Rules of Evidence inside and out!