People v. Wilson CA2/4

DISCUSSION

Appellant‘s only argument on appeal is that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of his prior conviction for brandishing a firearm. He contends there is an open question whether this offense is a crime of moral turpitude admissible to impeach his testimony. Even if it is, he argues, the evidence was not admissible under Evidence Code section 1101, subdivision (b). During trial, defense counsel informed the court that her client planned to testify, and requested a discussion about the use of his prior criminal record to impeach him. The prosecutor said he intended to ask appellant about his robbery conviction, to which the defense had stipulated, and also a misdemeanor conviction for brandishing a firearm in a menacing manner. The court said: ―I think he can also be asked about brandishing a firearm. It‘s helpful to the jury in terms of he might be in possession of a bulletproof vest.‖ Defense counsel questioned whether the 20092 brandishing offense constituted a crime of moral turpitude. The prosecutor argued: ―For brandishing a firearm, the question is the underlying circumstances. In this case, the court has the probation report in front of the court. But on…