Rule 105.     Limiting Evidence That Is Not Admissible Against Other Parties or for Other Purposes


If the court admits evidence that is admissible against a party or for a purpose — but not against another party or for another purpose — the court, on timely request, must restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly.


2011 Advisory Committee Note. – The language of this rule has been amended as part of the restyling of the Evidence Rules to make them more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility. This rule is the federal rule, verbatim.




This provision is the federal rule, verbatim, and is comparable to Rule 6, Utah Rules of Evidence (1971). This rule is to be read in conjunction with Rule 20(b), Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, concerning separate trials and Utah Code Annotated, Section 77-8a-1 (1953) concerning severance, and with the caveat that a limiting instruction may be illusory at best, particularly in a complex trial or one in which the evidence substantially consists of inferences, presumptions or circumstantial evidence. The danger of prejudice may also be greater in criminal cases, where life and liberty may be at stake. Cf. Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 762-63 (1946). See also Terry v. Z.C.M.I., 605 P.2d 314 (Utah 1979). The matter is addressed to the discretion of the trial judge.