Does a defendant have forfeited the issue of motive under section 1101, subdivision (b) of section 1103 of the Criminal Code for failing to provide evidence that the victim's prior criminal convictions would have bolstered his claim of self-defense?

Similarly here, defendant never advanced any theory upon which the victim's prior convictions would be admissible to prove motive under section 1101, subdivision (b) or how the prior convictions would have demonstrated a propensity for violence, thus bolstering his claim of self-defense under section 1103. He focused solely on two priorsthe possession for sale of methamphetamine and the criminal threatsnoting the two may be "somewhat relevant" but never explained in what manner even though the court had inquired as to why they would be relevant. Defendant made no argument nor advanced any theory that the priors were admissible as other acts evidence under section 1101, subdivision (b) or as propensity evidence under section 1103. Defense counsel never argued the priors were relevant to the issue of self-defense. As these theories of admissibility were not raised in the trial, despite the court's invitation to provide any additional theories of relevance, defendant has forfeited the issue. (See, e.g., People v.

Page 17