Can a criminal defendant refuse to stipulate or admit his way out of the full evidentiary force of the criminal case?

if the effect would be to deprive the state's case of its persuasiveness and forcefulness.' " (People v. Chism (2014) 58 Cal.4th 1266, 1307.) A trial court cannot force the prosecution to accept a stipulation, and " '[a] criminal defendant may not stipulate or admit his way out of the full evidentiary force of the case as the Government chooses to present it.' " (People v. Rogers (2013) 57 Cal.4th 296, 330.)

Here, the court examined the three predicate offenses offered by the prosecution and determined that their probative value outweighed their prejudicial effect. This was not an abuse of its discretion. For example, in People v. Hill (2011) 191 Cal.App.4th 1104, the appellate court upheld the admission of eight predicate offenses committed by gang members over the defendant's Evidence Code section 352 objections. (People v. Hill, supra, at pp. 1138-1139.) The court concluded the admission of the eight predicate offenses did not create a " 'street brawl' " or " 'endless discussions' " on the subject of gangs. (Id. at p. 1139.)