California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Linden, B264263 (Cal. App. 2016):
"A witness may be impeached with any prior conduct involving moral turpitude whether or not it resulted in a felony conviction, subject to the trial court's exercise of discretion under Evidence Code section 352." (People v. Clark (2011) 52 Cal.4th 856, 931.) "Because the [trial] court's discretion to admit or exclude impeachment evidence 'is as broad as necessary to deal with the great variety of factual situations in which the issue arises' [citation], a reviewing court ordinarily will uphold the trial court's exercise of discretion [citations]." (Id. at p. 932.) Appellant concedes that his 1992 conviction for lewd act on a child is a crime involving moral turpitude, but argues that the title should have been
Page 15
sanitized to minimize the prejudicial effect of a prior felony conviction. We find no prejudicial abuse of discretion. As noted, the 1992 conviction was mentioned only once by each side in a summary manner, and the prosecutor's comments referring to appellant's prior convictions focused on their relevance to appellant's credibility. (See People v. Hinton (2006) 37 Cal.4th 839, 888 ["Each side elicited the fact of the three impeaching convictions in very summary fashion. Defendant could not have been prejudiced by this procedure."].) In any event, given appellant's admission of multiple other felony convictions, we discern no prejudice.
E. Admission of Prior Conviction Allegations
1. Relevant Factual Background
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.