Which of the following is a permissible way to present evidence of a defendant's character?

Introducing evidence of a defendant's good reputation through character witnesses is a permissible way to present evidence of character in court. Character witnesses can offer their opinions based on what they have observed, heard, or personally know about the defendant. This type of evidence is often sought to establish that the defendant has a reputation for being honest, peaceful, or law-abiding, which can be relevant to the case, especially in criminal proceedings where character might help to support a defense.

This method aligns with evidentiary rules that allow for testimony regarding a person's character when it is relevant to a case. The credibility of these witnesses typically comes from their relationship to the defendant and their standing in the community, making it a legitimate form of evidence under certain circumstances.

In contrast, other options presented do not adhere to permissible methods of character evidence. Showing that the defendant has no prior convictions does not reflect character traits as it is merely a lack of evidence of prior wrongdoing. Using evidence of emotional state generally does not evaluate character in terms of moral integrity or behavior, but rather discusses situational feelings, which diverges from character analysis. Presenting unrelated life history fails to focus on relevant character attributes and would not assist the court in understanding the defendant's character in relation to the case at