Opinion ID: 2320012
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Garcia's Department Records

Text: [¶ 16] Mills also argues that the court abused its discretion in excluding Garcia's Department records as impermissible propensity evidence, pursuant to M.R. Evid. 404, [9] because he had a right to cross-examine her with respect to her familiarity with knives after she denied carrying a knife at the time of Jarmaine's death. However, there is no evidence in the record showing that Garcia lied about this fact. As the trial court properly concluded, the defense sought to use the Department records to suggest that because Garcia had carried a knife four years in the past, she may have been carrying a knife at the time of Jarmaine's death. This is the type of evidence that M.R. Evid. 404(b) explicitly prohibits. [¶ 17] As with the juvenile conviction, the real issue in the present case is whether the trial court committed clear error in precluding Mills from asking Garcia about her past possession of knives. For the reasons explained above, this line of questioning was not relevant because there was no evidence linking Garcia to the stabbing. This evidence was properly excludable pursuant to M.R. Evid. 401-402. Mills has not demonstrated that the trial court committed error. The entry is: Judgment affirmed.