Rule 105  Limited admissibility.  When
evidence which is admissible as to one party or for one purpose but not
admissible as to another party or for another purpose is admitted, the court,
upon request, shall restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the
jury accordingly. [L 1980, c 164, pt of §1]



 



RULE 105 COMMENTARY



 



  This rule is identical with Fed. R. Evid. 105.



  Hawaii has recognized the principle of limited
admissibility.  Low v. Honolulu Rapid Transit Co., 50 H. 582, 585-586, 445 P.2d
372, 376 (1968):  "It is a basic proposition that evidence may be properly
admitted for a limited permissible purpose even though it may not be admissible
for all purposes."  However, the present rule is not designed to provide
automatic, uncritical admission in every such instance.  As McCormick
observes:  "[I]n situations...where the danger of the jury's misuse of the
evidence for the incompetent purpose is great, and its value for the legitimate
purpose is slight...the judge's power to exclude the evidence altogether would
be recognized."  McCormick §59.



  Determination of limited admissibility under this rule,
therefore, involves a careful balance between the value of the evidence, in
terms of the limited purpose for which it is admissible, and the danger of
prejudice occasioned by possible consideration of the evidence by the jury for
improper purposes in disregard of the limiting instruction.  As the Advisory
Committee's Note to Fed. R. Evid. 105 puts it:  "A close relationship
exists between this rule and Rule 403."  The rule recognizes the necessity
for discretionary judicial exclusion of such evidence when the danger of
prejudice is great.  Cf. Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (1968).