What is the test for admitting evidence of pornography in a criminal case?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from The People v. Gardner, 2d Crim. No. B217376, Super. Ct. No. 2004023738, Super. Ct. No. 2008017794 (Cal. App. 2010):
"[A]n appellate court reviews any ruling by a trial court as to the admissibility of evidence for abuse of discretion." (People v. Alvarez (1996) 14 Cal.4th 155, 201.) "The court in its discretion may exclude evidence if its probative value is
Page 4
substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will... create substantial danger of undue prejudice...." (Evid. Code, 352.)
"[T]he propriety or impropriety of admitting evidence of a defendant's pornography will vary from case to case depending upon the facts...." (People v. Page (2008) 44 Cal.4th 1, 41, fn. 17.) Sexual "images possessed by a defendant" have been held to be admissible to prove material issues, such as a defendant's intent. (Id. at p. 40.) Trial courts must "exercise caution in weighing the probative value of individual examples of pornography possessed or accessed by a defendant." (Id. at p. 41, fn. 17.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
