Skip to content
Name: People v. Bingham (2023) 95 Cal.App.5th 1072
Case #: A163112
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 09/26/2023

The erroneous exclusion of impeachment evidence, pursuant to Evidence Code section 1202, of a key declarant does not require reversal unless the record as a whole shows the error caused a miscarriage of justice. Defendant was convicted of inflicting corporal injury on a romantic partner. The victim did not testify at trial, but her 911 call was admitted into evidence. The trial court excluded the victim’s prior convictions and inconsistent statements made after her 911 call, which defendant offered for impeachment (Evid. Code, § 1202). Defendant appealed. Held: Affirmed on this point but remanded for resentencing. The parties agreed that…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Carkhum-Murphy
Case #: C085347
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/21/2019

Trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing prosecution to introduce evidence of defendant's prior convictions to impeach his exculpatory hearsay statement, which was initially introduced by the prosecution. Defendant was charged with robbery based on evidence that he took money during a transaction at a liquor store and pointed a gun at the store cashier when she tried to retrieve the money. At trial, the prosecution introduced defendant's statements, which he made during a police interview, that he took the money from the store but did not have a gun. Defendant did not testify, but his girlfriend testified…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Felix
Case #: C079382
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/16/2019

Trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted evidence of a prior crime the defendant and codefendant committed together to show defendant's knowledge of his codefendant's violent propensities. Felix got into an argument with several employees at a bar. As the employees were leaving work that night, Felix and his codefendant Jones confronted the employees and a fight ensued in which Jones stabbed one of the employees. Felix was prosecuted under two theories of attempted murder: straight aiding and abetting, and aiding and abetting under the natural and probable consequences doctrine. He was convicted of attempted murder…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Calhoun
Case #: G055511
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 07/09/2019

Evidence of a human trafficking victim's prostitution activity that occurred after defendant's arrest for trafficking was inadmissible for impeachment purposes. Defendant recruited 13-year-old D.T., a runaway, as a prostitute, acted as her pimp, and had sex with her. He was convicted of human trafficking of a minor under the age of 16, lewd acts on a minor, pandering a minor, and other offenses. On appeal defendant argued the trial court erred by excluding evidence of D.T.'s prostitution activity that occurred after defendant was arrested. Held: Affirmed. Evidence of sexual history or any commercial sexual act committed by victims of human…

View Full Summary
Name: Assn. for L.A. Deputy Sheriffs v. Superior Court
Case #: S243855
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 08/26/2019

Opinion by Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye (unanimous decision).

A law enforcement agency's "Brady list" is confidential to the extent that officers are included on the list based on information obtained from confidential personnel records. In 2016, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (the Department) informed roughly 300 deputy sheriffs in the Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (the Association) that their names may be provided to prosecutorial agencies on a "Brady list" because a review of their personnel records had identified potential exculpatory or impeachment information. The Association obtained a preliminary injunction preventing the Department from disclosing the identity…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Bedolla
Case #: H044681
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/22/2018

A violent felony allegation under Penal Code section 667, subdivision (c)(21) (a person other than an accomplice present during a burglary) does not apply to attempted first degree burglary. Bedolla and his accomplice knocked on and kicked the front door of a house, but did not enter the house. A jury convicted Bedolla of attempted first degree burglary and found true an allegation that someone other than an accomplice was present during the commission of the attempted burglary. (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (c)(21).) On appeal, Bedolla argued the section 667, subdivision (c)(21) allegation must be stricken because…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Gutierrez
Case #: E068135
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 10/10/2018

Trial court did not err by allowing the prosecution to impeach defendant with evidence of the conduct underlying his prior felony conviction because it substantially augmented the showing of dishonesty. Gutierrez was charged with attempted carjacking. The trial court denied his motion to preclude the introduction of, or to sanitize, his two prior felony convictions (a 2008 robbery and a 2011 felony evading) for impeachment. In connection with the felony evading conviction, Gutierrez was also convicted of misdemeanor auto theft and receiving a stolen vehicle. The trial court's ruling permitted the prosecution to also ask "isn't it true…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Hall
Case #: A147923
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 05/18/2018

Murder conviction overturned where trial court reversed its initial ruling that evidence of defendant's prior misdemeanor conduct was unduly prejudicial, and allowed the evidence to impeach a statement defendant gave to police. Hall was convicted of first degree murder in the stabbing death of a man. The trial court initially excluded evidence of Hall's prior misdemeanor conduct of brandishing a knife as unduly prejudicial. However, after Hall testified, the trial court reversed its ruling and admitted the misdemeanor conduct to impeach a statement Hall had given to police, which had been introduced by the prosecution. Hall appealed. Held: Reversed. Evidence…

View Full Summary
Name: Peope v. Gonzales
Case #: B276101
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 10/23/2017

Trial court did not err by instructing the jury with CALCRIM No. 1191 regarding defendant's prior uncharged sex offenses against the witness who testified at trial about the charged offenses. At Gonzales' trial for various child molestation offenses against L.W., she testified about both charged and uncharged sex offenses that Gonzales committed against her. The court instructed the jury that it could consider the uncharged conduct if the prosecution had proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Gonzales in fact committed the uncharged offenses. (CALCRIM No. 1191.) The jury convicted Gonzales. On appeal, he argued that this instruction should…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Edwards
Case #: H042144
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 05/16/2017

Trial court did not err when it allowed the prosecutor to rebut an expert's diagnosis during the sanity phase of a murder trial by using defendant's suppressed statements. A jury found Edwards guilty of first degree murder. During the sanity phase of his case, the trial court allowed the prosecution to use Edwards' statements, which had been suppressed because they were made after he invoked his right to counsel, to impeach the testimony of his expert witnesses. The jury found him sane at the time of the murder. On appeal he challenged the admission of his suppressed statements. Held: Affirmed.…

View Full Summary