Andrew v. White

{{Use mdy dates|date=January 2025}}

{{Infobox SCOTUS case

| Litigants = Andrew v. White

| ArgueDate =

| ArgueYear =

| DecideDate = January 21

| DecideYear = 2025

| FullName = Brenda Evers Andrew v. Tamika White, Warden

| USVol = 604

| USPage =

| ParallelCitations =

| Docket = 23-6573

| OralArgument =

| OpinionAnnouncement = https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/604/23-6573/

| Prior =

| Subsequent =

| Holding = At the time of the decision of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, clearly established federal law provided that the erroneous admission of unduly prejudicial evidence could render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair in violation of due process; the judgment below is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

| PerCuriam = true

| Majority =

| JoinMajority =

| Concurrence = Alito

| JoinConcurrence =

| Dissent = Thomas

| JoinDissent = Gorsuch

| LawsApplied =

}}

Andrew v. White, {{ussc|604||2025}}, was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court vacated and remanded the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, holding that as established on Payne v. Tennessee, the Due Process Clause forbids the introduction of evidence so unduly prejudicial as to render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair.{{Cite web |title=Andrew v. White, 604 U.S. ___ (2025) |url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/604/23-6573/ |access-date=2025-01-22 |website=Justia Law |language=en}}{{Cite web |title=Andrew v. White |url=https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/andrew-v-white/ |access-date=2025-01-22 |website=SCOTUSblog |language=en-US}}