People v. Kittridge CA2/2, B331026

Trevor Charles Kittridge was convicted by a jury of attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon after stabbing Sunny H. following a dispute at a hotel.
The jury found true the allegations of personal use of a deadly weapon and infliction of great bodily injury, but found the attempted murder was not willful, premeditated, or deliberate.
Kittridge admitted to the stabbing but claimed self-defense, alleging the victim pointed a gun at him during their altercation.
At trial, Kittridge sought to admit a photo of Sunny holding a gun, arguing it supported his self-defense claim, but the court excluded this photo as lacking relevance and sufficient foundation.
The jury received instructions on the limitations of self-defense for initial aggressors or provocateurs, which Kittridge contested as improper.
On appeal, Kittridge challenged the exclusion of the gun photo and the jury instructions, while both parties agreed the judgment should be corrected to reflect the jury's finding regarding premeditation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Exclusion of gun photo as evidence	Photo irrelevant & unduly time consuming to authenticate	Photo highly probative to self-defense claim	Properly excluded; minimal probative value, undue time required
Instruction on self-defense for initial aggressor/provocateur	Instructions proper based on defendant’s act of throwing soda	Instructions inapplicable; no initial aggression	Instructions proper; evidence supported giving them
Correction of abstract of judgment	Abstract incorrectly states attempted murder was willful/premeditated	Agrees abstract must be corrected	Court orders correction to reflect jury’s finding

People v. Clark, 63 Cal.4th 522 (Cal. 2016) (standard for reviewing evidentiary rulings is abuse of discretion)
People v. Mitchell, 7 Cal.5th 561 (Cal. 2019) (de novo review applies to claims of instructional error)
People v. Thomas, 14 Cal.5th 327 (Cal. 2023) (appellate review of exclusion of evidence)
People v. Johnsen, 10 Cal.5th 1116 (Cal. 2021) (balancing probative value vs. undue consumption of time for evidence)
People v. Mitchell, 26 Cal.4th 181 (Cal. 2001) (appellate court can order correction of abstracts of judgment)