Evidence Code § 1101
E1030144
Evidence Code § 1101 is a key California evidence rule that generally prohibits using a person’s character or prior bad acts to prove conduct on a specific occasion, while allowing such evidence for limited purposes like proving motive, intent, or identity.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Evid. Code, § 1101 | 1 |
| Evidence Code § 1101 canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T13239853 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Evidence Code § 1101 Context triple: [California Evidence Code, hasSection, Evidence Code § 1101]
-
A.
Evidence Code § 801
Evidence Code § 801 is a provision of the California Evidence Code that governs the admissibility of expert opinion testimony, specifying when and how experts may base and present their opinions in court.
-
B.
Evidence Code § 210
Evidence Code § 210 is a provision of California law that defines what constitutes "relevant evidence" for purposes of admissibility in court proceedings.
-
C.
Evidence Code § 1271
Evidence Code § 1271 is a California statute that sets out the business records exception to the hearsay rule, allowing certain records made in the regular course of business to be admitted as evidence in court.
-
D.
Evidence Code § 1291
Evidence Code § 1291 is a California statute that sets out when former testimony may be admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule, particularly when the declarant is unavailable and the opposing party had a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
-
E.
Code of Evidence
The Code of Evidence is a comprehensive set of rules governing the admissibility and use of evidence in Connecticut courts.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Evidence Code § 1101 Target entity description: Evidence Code § 1101 is a key California evidence rule that generally prohibits using a person’s character or prior bad acts to prove conduct on a specific occasion, while allowing such evidence for limited purposes like proving motive, intent, or identity.
-
A.
Evidence Code § 801
Evidence Code § 801 is a provision of the California Evidence Code that governs the admissibility of expert opinion testimony, specifying when and how experts may base and present their opinions in court.
-
B.
Evidence Code § 210
Evidence Code § 210 is a provision of California law that defines what constitutes "relevant evidence" for purposes of admissibility in court proceedings.
-
C.
Evidence Code § 1271
Evidence Code § 1271 is a California statute that sets out the business records exception to the hearsay rule, allowing certain records made in the regular course of business to be admitted as evidence in court.
-
D.
Evidence Code § 1291
Evidence Code § 1291 is a California statute that sets out when former testimony may be admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule, particularly when the declarant is unavailable and the opposing party had a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
-
E.
Code of Evidence
The Code of Evidence is a comprehensive set of rules governing the admissibility and use of evidence in Connecticut courts.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
California evidence statute
ⓘ
rule of evidence ⓘ |
| allowsExceptionFor |
absence of mistake
ⓘ
common plan or scheme ⓘ identity ⓘ intent ⓘ knowledge ⓘ motive ⓘ noncharacter purposes ⓘ opportunity ⓘ preparation ⓘ |
| appliesTo |
civil cases
ⓘ
criminal cases ⓘ |
| category | substantive admissibility rule ⓘ |
| citationForm |
Evid. Code, § 1101
ⓘ
linked to:
Evidence Code § 1101
|
| codifies | general prohibition on character evidence to prove conduct ⓘ |
| distinguishedFrom | rules governing impeachment by character evidence ⓘ |
| frameworkFor | admitting evidence of uncharged misconduct ⓘ |
| governs |
admissibility of character evidence
ⓘ
admissibility of prior bad acts evidence ⓘ |
| influencedBy | common law rules on character evidence ⓘ |
| interactsWith | California jury instructions on prior acts evidence ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
California
ⓘ
linked to:
California, United States
|
| languageIncludes |
evidence of a person’s character or a trait of his or her character
ⓘ
evidence of specific instances of conduct ⓘ |
| limits | use of other crimes evidence ⓘ |
| objective | to focus the jury on relevant, nonpropensity inferences ⓘ |
| partOf | California Evidence Code ⓘ |
| permits | use of prior bad acts to prove specific facts in issue ⓘ |
| policyBasis |
fairness in adjudication
ⓘ
reliability of verdicts ⓘ |
| primaryRule |
character evidence is inadmissible to prove conduct on a specific occasion
ⓘ
evidence of a person’s disposition is inadmissible to prove conduct on a specific occasion ⓘ |
| prohibits | use of prior bad acts solely to show propensity ⓘ |
| protects |
civil litigants from unfair character attacks
ⓘ
criminal defendants from unfair character attacks ⓘ |
| purposeOfProhibition |
to avoid confusing the issues
ⓘ
to limit undue consumption of time ⓘ to prevent propensity reasoning ⓘ to reduce unfair prejudice ⓘ |
| relatedTo | Evidence Code § 352 ⓘ |
| requires |
balancing of probative value and prejudicial effect under Evidence Code § 352
ⓘ
trial court to distinguish between character and noncharacter purposes ⓘ |
| subjectOf | California appellate case law interpretation ⓘ |
| usedBy |
California Supreme Court
ⓘ
linked to:
Supreme Court of California
California appellate courts ⓘ
linked to:
California Courts of Appeal
California trial courts ⓘ
linked to:
California Superior Courts
|
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Evidence Code § 1101 Description of subject: Evidence Code § 1101 is a key California evidence rule that generally prohibits using a person’s character or prior bad acts to prove conduct on a specific occasion, while allowing such evidence for limited purposes like proving motive, intent, or identity.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
linked to: Evidence Code § 1101