People v. Loera CA3

DISCUSSION

I There Was No Error In The Court’s Exclusion Of Testimony Defendant contends he was denied his constitutional right to present a defense when the court excluded testimony critical to his defense. The evidence the court excluded was defendant’s testimony that Rick told him the altered pen worked to fix an appliance and would “facilitate what he needed do to with his television.” The court excluded the evidence, ruling that “ultimately . . . it is largely moot because the defendant testified to that same information.” The court was within its discretion to exclude the evidence because, as the court noted, similar evidence had already been presented. Defendant had already testified that “Rick” gave him the altered pen, and defendant was going to use it like a screwdriver to fix a television. The altered pen would have been useful because it had a flat surface, similar to a Phillips screwdriver. A court acts within its discretion when it excludes evidence that is cumulative. (People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, 576.) As to defendant’s claim that the court’s exclusion of this evidence violated his right to present a defense, it did not. He got in the defense he wanted,…