People v. Muriel CA4/3

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Robert Muriel appeals from a jury verdict finding him guilty of attempted murder, aggravated assault, shooting at an inhabited dwelling, and street terrorism. He has one complaint to make about his trial: The court abused the discretion 1 afforded to it under Evidence Code section 352 by allowing one of the witnesses to testify about his fear of retaliation for his testimony and the facts underlying this fear. According to Muriel, this evidence was unduly prejudicial and resulted in a guilty verdict, which he would not otherwise have suffered. We affirm. The trial court properly limited the witness’ statements regarding his fear of retaliation by immediately instructing the jury that it was to consider this testimony only as it bore on the witness’ credibility and for no other purpose. We assume that the jury followed this instruction. Moreover, even if we assume the jury disregarded the court’s instruction, Muriel has not explained how this testimony could have affected the verdict so that the outcome of the trial would have been different. 2

FACTS

On September 10, 2006, 14-year-old Jesse Niutapuai was standing in the front yard of his house in…