How have courts interpreted statements by a defendant to a victim that he "knew what he was doing" in the context of the shooting?

therefrom." (People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978, 1035.) There was simply no other implied meaning from the statement. Rather, the inference sought was that appellant intended to shoot the victim. Appellant's statement was used in this case as circumstantial evidence of his intent to kill. Such an inference was eminently reasonable from appellant's express words and was undoubtedly relevant on the issue of appellant's intent at the time of the shooting. (People v. Hovarter (2008) 44 Cal.4th 983, 1009-1010 [defendant's statement to rape victim that he "knew what he was doing" provided inference he had committed similar crimes and was relevant to show state of mind].) We conclude the statement was relevant and admissible in these proceedings.

The judgment is affirmed.