Does a defendant have a constitutional right to present irrelevant evidence in the defence?

The trial court properly excluded the evidence under our state evidentiary rules. Even assuming defendant has not forfeited his constitutional claim by failing to raise it in the trial court, application of the ordinary rules of evidence generally does not deprive a defendant of the opportunity to present a defense. (People v. Hamlin (2009) 170 Cal.App.4th 1412, 1450.) Defendant had no constitutional right to present irrelevant evidence.

We conclude there was no evidentiary error, and we therefore need not address the parties' arguments about harmless error.

Page 15

Defendant next contends CALCRIM No. 1190 deprived him of due process. We disagree.