Brown

People v. Brown

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 71·2000 Daily Journal DAR 1271·77 Cal. App. 4th 1324·92 Cal. Rptr. 2d 433·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 888
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 2000A083896California4,963 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ruvolo, J.

I.

Introduction

Appellant Antoine Maurice Brown was convicted by jury of numerous offenses resulting from his violent assault on his girlfriend during a domestic dispute. Brown noticed this appeal after being sentenced to 23 years in state prison as a “second strike” offender under California’s “Three Strikes” law (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i)). In the published portion of this opinion, we consider numerous contentions regarding Evidence Code section 1109, which was enacted in 1996 and allows admission of “evidence of [a] defendant’s commission of other domestic violence” in a criminal action in which the defendant “is accused of an offense involving domestic violence.” Specifically, we consider Brown’s contention that the admission of his prior acts of domestic violence under section 1109 deprived him of his constitutional right to a fair trial under the due process clause. (U.S. Const., 5th & 14th Amends.; Cal. Const., art. I, § 15.) We also consider Brown’s argument that the court’s instructions regarding this evidence permitted the jury to find him guilty without finding beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the charged offenses. Finally, we decide whether…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.