California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Johnson, C076191, C076607 (Cal. App. 2020):
The trial court has broad discretion in determining whether evidence is relevant, and if so, whether the evidence nevertheless should be excluded under Evidence Code section 352. We review the trial court's exercise of that discretion under the abuse of discretion standard. (People v. Rogers (2013) 57 Cal.4th 296, 326.)
Luong contends that the standard for admissibility of third-party intimidation evidence is so broad that it violates the accused's due process rights unless Evidence Code section 352 functions as a meaningful limitation upon the admission of such evidence. Evidence of third-party threats, however, is limited by Evidence Code section 352. (People v. Mendoza (2011) 52 Cal.4th 1056, 1085 [trial court has discretion "within the limits of Evidence Code section 352" to permit the introduction of third-party
Page 21
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.