People v. McGeough CA3

DISCUSSION

Defendant argues on appeal that the trial court abused its discretion in allowing Y.B. to testify that he strangled her with his hands approximately five years prior to Stephanie’s death. He contends that this incident: (1) is too dissimilar to the charged offense to warrant admission under Evidence Code section 1101,1 and (2) does not survive the section 352 balancing test. 2 We disagree. Additional Background The People moved in limine to introduce testimony of two of defendant’s former girlfriends, L.L. and Y.B. L.L. would testify that defendant used a ligature to strangle her during a fight shortly after they broke up in 1998, and Y.B. was to testify that defendant used his hands to strangle her in 2012. At the motion in limine hearing, the trial court excluded L.L.’s testimony, reasoning that it was too remote in time and therefore failed the section 352 balancing test. But the trial court decided to admit Y.B.’s testimony because “they’re close enough” and “even though arguably . . . there are some

Further undesignated statutory references are to the Evidence Code. 2 In the trial court, the People also relied on the doctrine of chances as a basis for…