Saturday, April 17, 2010

From People v. Ferguson, No. E047477, Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division Two.

"... Moreover, the weak probative value of the evidence was strongly outweighed by the danger that it would consume an undue amount of time, confuse the issues, and mislead the jury. The primary issue at trial was whether defendant was the individual in the photographs and in the video. Although defendant's admission bore on this issue, both the parties and the court repeatedly recognized that resolution of the issue would be made by the jury's determination of whether defendant was, in fact, the individual shown in the video and photographs. The issue at trial was not whether the detectives were bad people, but whether defendant was the depicted individual. Thus, defendant's admission was not the central issue in the context of the trial ..."

"... The jury simply found that defendant was the individual depicted in the photographs and video or disbelieved defendant's contention that her admission was coerced ..."

"... 'A printed representation of images stored on a video or digital medium is presumed to be an accurate representation of the images it purports to represent. This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence. If a party to an action introduces evidence that a printed representation of images stored on a video or digital medium is inaccurate or unreliable, the party introducing the printed representation into evidence has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of evidence, that the printed representation is an accurate representation of the existence and content of the images that it purports to represent." (Evid. Code, § 1553.) "The trial court's exercise of discretion in admitting the evidence is reviewed on appeal for abuse of discretion. [Citation.]" (People v. Catlin (2001) 26 Cal.4th 81, 134.) ..."

Click here to read the whole ruling.


No comments: