People v. Spector
194 Cal. App. 4th 1335
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Spector was convicted by jury of second degree murder with firearm enhancements and sentenced to 19 years to life; Clarkson was killed at Spector’s home after being driven there from the House of Blues; the central issue was whether Clarkson’s death was implied malice murder by Spector or suicide by Clarkson; the defense contested forensic and state-of-mind evidence and challenged the admissibility of certain trial evidence; the prosecution sought to corroborate Clarkson’s death with crime-scene forensics and other-crimes evidence involving Spector’s prior assaults on women; the retrial admitted a videotaped exchange involving the trial judge and crime-science testimony, which Spector challenged on multiple grounds
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of videotape from first trial | tape clarified Lintemoot’s testimony | video constitutes improper witness-witness or Crawford issue | No reversible error; tape used for clarification, not for truth |
| Admission of other crimes evidence | evidence relevant to absence of mistake or accident and to motive | unduly prejudicial and improper under 1101/352 | Admissible; probative on absence of accident/mistake and motive; not abuse of discretion |
| Admission of generic threat evidence (1250) | threats show state of mind and intent | evidence improper as to state of mind or credibility | Admissible under 1250; context and reliability preserved; not reversible error |
| Prosecutorial misconduct during closing | prosecutor properly argued theories and pattern evidence; no misconduct | remarks impermissibly attacked defense or witnesses | No reversible prosecutorial misconduct; arguments within permissible bounds |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Ewoldt, 7 Cal.4th 380 (Cal. 1994) (established 1101(b) framework and factors balancing probative value versus prejudice)
- People v. Lisenba, 14 Cal.2d 403 (Cal. 1939) (admissibility of uncharged conduct to show absence of accident or to prove corpus delicti)
- People v. Carpenter, 15 Cal.4th 312 (Cal. 1997) (doctrine of chances and admissibility of prior acts for actus reus)
- People v. Cavanaugh, 44 Cal.2d 252 (Cal. 1955) (pattern evidence and relevance of similar conduct to prove guilt)
- People v. Pic'l, 114 Cal.App.3d 824 (Cal. App. 1981) (concept of motive as state of mind and admissibility of prior acts)
- People v. Carlucci, 23 Cal.3d 249 (Cal. 1979) (judge may clarify testimony; evidentiary clarifications are permissible)