People v. Contreras CA4/1

INTRODUCTION

A jury convicted Andrea Contreras of attempted first degree murder and related offenses following an incident in which she shot her former romantic partner on the I-8 freeway. At a resentencing hearing held during the pendency of this appeal, she was given a total sentence of 20 years to life. On appeal, Contreras asserts three challenges to the verdict. First, she claims her trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object when the prosecutor presented evidence and argument that assertedly highlighted her

silence following Miranda1 warnings, in violation of her right to due process under Doyle v. Ohio (1976) 426 U.S. 610, 618 (Doyle). We conclude there was no Doyle violation, and so we reject the related claim counsel was ineffective due to his failure to object. Second, she claims the trial court prejudicially

erred and violated Evidence Code2 section 352 when it admitted two exhibits that evidenced her work as a prostitute. We find no error with respect to the admission of the first exhibit and no resulting prejudice with respect to the admission of the second exhibit. Third, she claims the cumulative effect of the foregoing errors violated her right to due…