California Court of Appeal

Conviction of defendant for attempted murder of his girlfriend and related charges is affirmed where: 1) Evidence Code section 1109 is constitutional on its face; 2) the remoteness of the prior acts of domestic violence did not render application of section 1109 unconstitutional, and the court did not abuse its discretion in admitting that evidence; 3) trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the evidence was not substantially more prejudicial than probative under section 352 and section 1109(a); 4) court properly determined that admission of the evidence was "in the interest of justice" under section 1109(c); 5) any hypothesized error in the admission of evidence was harmless; and 6) court's ruling under section 1101(b) was proper, and any instructional error on this point was harmless.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/09/2010
• Published 06/09/2010

Judges

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Attorney for Defendant/Appellant) Edmund G. Brown Jr. Attorney General Dane R. Gillette Chief Assistant Attorney General Gerald A. Engler Senior Assistant Attorney General Catherine A. Rivlin Supervising Deputy Attorney General David H. Rose Deputy Attorney General (, Attorneys for Plaintiff/Respondent - The People of the State of California)