People v. Rodriguez CA2/3

DISCUSSION

1. The Court Did Not Erroneously Exclude Testimony Concerning Suggestive Questions. a. Pertinent Facts. The amended information alleged, inter alia, as to counts 1 and 2 that appellant committed a lewd act upon a child under 14 years old (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)), i.e., upon victims M.M. and Se.M., respectively. Each of counts 3, 19, 20, and 21 alleged appellant committed that crime against Evelyn M. In October 2013, appellant was arraigned on the amended information and the court granted the People’s motion to dismiss count 3. On November 6, 2013, Carranza testified for the defense, inter alia, as follows. Carranza, and M.M.’s mother (hereafter, the mother), were at Karina M.’s house when the mother had a chance to talk with some of the girls about the allegations.2 In response to a nonleading question, Carranza testified that M.M., Se.M. and Evelyn M. were present when the mother was asking questions.3 The following occurred during appellant’s direct examination of Carranza: “Q How was she [the mother] asking those questions? [¶] A She was suggesting.” The court asked for a sidebar.

2 Appellant’s counsel asked Carranza, “And [the girls] are all together when…