Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, needless presentation of cumulative evidence, or unfair and harmful surprise. However, in a prosecution for any criminal homicide, an appropriate photograph of the victim while alive shall be admissible evidence when offered by the district attorney to show the general appearance and condition of the victim while alive.
§ 2403.Exclusion of Relevant Evidence On Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion Or Cumulative Nature of Evidence
Chapter 40: Oklahoma Evidence Code · Last amended March 19, 2003 · Last verified August 3, 2026
In one sentenceLets a court exclude relevant evidence when its probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice, confusion, delay, cumulativeness, or unfair surprise, while separately making a photograph of a homicide victim while alive admissible when the district attorney offers it to show the victim's appearance and condition.
Full Text of § 2403
Amendment History
Laws 1978, SB 276, c. 285, § 403, eff. 10/1/1978; Amended by Laws 2002, HB 2216, c. 128, §1, eff. 11/1/2002 (repealed by Laws 2003, HB 1816, c. 3, §16, emerg. eff. 3/19/2003); Amended by Laws 2002, HB 1939, c. 468, §30, eff. 11/1/2002; Amended by Laws 2003, HB 1816, c. 3, §15, emerg. eff. 3/19/2003.
Note
Laws 2002, c. 128, § 1 repealed by Laws 2003, c. 3, § 16, emerg. eff. March 19, 2003.
Plain-English Summary
This is Oklahoma's version of Federal Rule of Evidence 403: relevant evidence can still be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, needless cumulative evidence, or unfair and harmful surprise. The balancing test tilts toward admission -- the danger has to substantially outweigh the value, not just outweigh it.
The second sentence adds an Oklahoma-specific rule with no counterpart in the federal rule: in a criminal homicide prosecution, an appropriate photograph of the victim while alive is admissible when the district attorney offers it to show the victim's general appearance and condition in life. This provision has had a tangled legislative history -- the Legislature amended it twice in 2002 and 2003, and one of those 2002 amendments was itself repealed within months by emergency legislation in March 2003.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can relevant evidence still be kept out of an Oklahoma trial?
Yes. Section 2403 lets a court exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice, confusion, misleading the jury, undue delay, needless cumulative evidence, or unfair surprise.
Can prosecutors show a photo of a homicide victim while they were alive?
Yes. Section 2403 makes an appropriate photograph of the victim while alive admissible when the district attorney offers it to show the victim's general appearance and condition while alive.
How high a bar is Oklahoma's prejudice-exclusion standard?
High, by the statute's own terms -- the danger of prejudice or the other listed harms must substantially outweigh the evidence's probative value, not merely outweigh it.
Is this the same balancing test as Federal Rule of Evidence 403?
The prejudice-balancing language closely tracks FRE 403, though Oklahoma's version adds the homicide-victim-photograph provision that has no federal counterpart.
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
Title 12 of the Oklahoma Statutes, enacted by the Oklahoma Legislature.
Last verified August 3, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: oklahoma unfair prejudice evidence exclusion12 O.S. § 2403FRE 403 oklahoma equivalenthomicide victim photograph evidence oklahoma