People v. King CA3

DISCUSSION

I The Court Did Not Err In Admitting Defendant’s Prior Acts Of Domestic Violence Under Evidence Code Section 1109 Or Evidence Code Section 352 Defendant contends Evidence Code section 1109 is unconstitutional under the federal and state constitutions as a violation of due process. He further contends that even if the section is constitutional, the trial court abused its discretion under Evidence Code section 352 in admitting the evidence of uncharged acts. He is wrong on both accounts, as we explain below. A Evidence Code Section 1109 Is Constitutional Evidence Code section 1109, subdivision (a)(1), permits the admissibility of prior acts of domestic violence to show the defendant’s propensity to commit such violent acts. The section is almost identical with Evidence Code section 1108, subdivision (a), which permits similar propensity evidence in sex offense cases. Both sections depart from the normal limitation on the use of uncharged acts, which are not admissible to show

3 propensity, but must be admitted only to the extent they are relevant to prove some other matter at issue in the case. (Evid. Code, § 1101, subds. (a) & (b).) In People v. Falsetta (1999) 21…