What is the legal test for admitting evidence of abuse of power in a criminal case?

People v. Clair (1992) 2 Cal.4th 629, 676, 7 Cal.Rptr.2d 564, 828 P.2d 705.) Once presented, whether the evidence of other acts is significant enough to be given weight in the penalty determination is for the jury to decide. ( People v. Smith (2005) 35 Cal.4th 334, 369, 25 Cal.Rptr.3d 554, 107 P.3d 229.)

We review a trial courts decision to admit evidence of other crimes for abuse of discretion, " and no abuse of discretion will be found where, in fact, the evidence in question was legally sufficient. " ( People v. Whisenhunt (2008) 44 Cal.4th 174, 225, 79 Cal.Rptr.3d 125, 186 P.3d 496.) "On appeal, the test of legal sufficiency is whether there is substantial evidence, i.e., evidence from which a reasonable trier of fact could conclude that the prosecution sustained its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citations.] Evidence meeting this standard satisfies constitutional due process and reliability concerns." ( People v. Boyer (2006) 38 Cal.4th 412, 479-480, 42 Cal.Rptr.3d 677, 133 P.3d 581.)

Defendant asserts the evidence was insufficient because the gun clip was a movable object. He relies on Mikes v. Borg (9th Cir. 1991) 947 F.2d 353 ( Mikes ), a case in which the prosecutions only evidence against the defendant consisted of fingerprints found on a disassembled turnstile the victim had recently purchased at a going-out-of-business sale. ( Id . at p. 355.) The federal appellate court stated that "in fingerprint-only cases in which the prosecutions theory is based on the premise that the defendant handled certain

[8 Cal.5th 516]