D082765
Cal. Ct. App.May 17, 2024Background
- Damian I. Velasquez was convicted by a jury of carjacking, assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury, and unlawfully taking and driving a vehicle.
- The charges arose from an incident where Velasquez assaulted R.M., took his truck, and was later apprehended with the vehicle.
- The prosecution moved to allow impeachment of Velasquez with a prior federal felony conviction if he testified; the court allowed impeachment with a sanitized mention of the felony, but excluded a prior misdemeanor.
- Velasquez did not testify at trial, voluntarily waiving his right to do so.
- He appealed, contending the in limine ruling regarding potential impeachment testimony prevented him from testifying and thus violated his rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preservation of in limine error on appeal when defendant does not testify | Argument barred because Velasquez voluntarily waived his right to testify | In limine ruling forced a dilemma: not testify or risk impeachment, violating rights; Luce rule should not apply | Luce rule applies; because Velasquez did not testify, he cannot challenge the in limine ruling |
| Applicability and continued validity of the Luce rule in California | Luce rule is binding precedent in California | Luce rule is unfair and eroded by recent case law, should be revisited | Court bound by precedent; Luce rule remains binding and unaltered |
| Federal constitutional right to testify as impacted by in limine ruling | No constitutional violation; threat of impeachment doesn't bar testimony | In limine ruling violated federal constitutional right to testify | No constitutional violation; impeachment risk is not a bar to testifying |
Key Cases Cited
- Luce v. United States, 469 U.S. 38 (1984) (defendant must testify to preserve appellate challenge to in limine ruling admitting prior convictions for impeachment)
- People v. Collins, 42 Cal.3d 378 (Cal. 1986) (California adopts Luce rule requiring defendant to testify to preserve error for impeachment by prior conviction)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court, 57 Cal.2d 450 (Cal. 1962) (lower courts bound by California Supreme Court precedent)