Opinion ID: 1442323
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Statement Regarding M-1 Rifle

Text: In a taped interview with police officers, defendant indicated that although he did not attempt to escape from Mrs. Lyman's house when the police arrived and announced their presence, nonetheless If I'd have had my M-1 Carbine, yeah, I'd have come out. But I don't  I didn't have it. The trial court admitted the statement at the special circumstance phase over defendant's objection, reasoning that it was relevant to the issue of his state of mind at the time of the killing. (17) Defendant renews his objection on appeal, claiming the statement was irrelevant to the contested issue of his intent to kill, and further was unduly prejudicial when weighed against any slight relevance his remark might have had. We disagree. The statement was clearly relevant for it indicated that defendant would have initiated a gun battle with police if he had been armed with his rifle, thus disclosing defendant's readiness to react violently when he had the opportunity to do so. We conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the statement's relevance outweighed its prejudicial effect.