CT · rules
Conn. Code Evid. § 4-2
Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible; Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible
All relevant evidence is admissible, except as
otherwise provided by the constitution of the
United States, the constitution of the state of Connecticut, the Code, the General Statutes or the
common law. Evidence that is not relevant is inadmissible.
History
(Amended Dec. 14, 2017, to take effect Feb. 1, 2018.) COMMENTARY Section 4-2 recognizes two fundamental common-law prin- ciples: (1) all relevant evidence is admissible unless otherwise excluded; e.g., Delmore v. Polinsky, 132 Conn. 28, 31, 42 A.2d 349 (1945); see Federated Dept. Stores, Inc. v. Board of Tax Review, 162 Conn. 77, 82–83, 291 A.2d 715 (1971); and (2) irrelevant evidence is inadmissible. Williams Ford, Inc. v. Hartford Courant Co., 232 Conn. 559, 569, 657 A.2d 212 (1995); see State v. Mastropetre, 175 Conn. 512, 521, 400 A.2d 276 (1978). Reference in Section 4-2 to the federal and state constitu- tions includes judicially created remedies designed to preserve constitutional rights, such as the exclusionary rule. See State v. Marsala, 216 Conn. 150, 161, 579 A.2d 58 (1990) (construing exclusionary rule under Connecticut constitution).
Provenance
- Source
- jud.ct.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-15
- Content hash
3b90d9c29e23c5cbf087986f048831fb55e031cfb4f30aee0a2ee6fd517b2d1f
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.