People v. Murguia CA4/2

DISCUSSION

A. PRIOR OFFENSE EVIDENCE

1. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

During motions in limine, the prosecutor moved to introduce evidence that

defendant had previously been “found by officers walking down the street with a loaded

weapon, with 13 baggies of methamphetamine, one bagg[ie] with three rocks of cocaine

and seven baggies of marijuana.” Specifically, the prosecutor wanted to present

evidence that defendant possessed the seven baggies of marijuana and testimony that an

officer believed defendant possessed the marijuana for sale. (Evid. Code, § 1101, subd.

3 (b).) The prosecutor asserted the evidence was relevant to show defendant‟s

“knowledge and . . . intent,” specifically, that defendant intended to sell the marijuana

he possessed in prison. The prosecutor argued any prejudicial effect did “not exist,”

because it was “the same conduct, the same drug” as charged in the current case.

The trial court found the prior offense evidence was relevant to proving an intent

to sell, but concluded mentioning the methamphetamine or rock cocaine would be too

prejudicial. Defendant‟s trial counsel asserted the evidence concerning the prior

marijuana possession would also…