Opinion ID: 2509294
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Admission of Evidence of Hit-and-run Conviction

Text: On direct examination, Dr. Vicary testified that defendant had no prior criminal record as a juvenile or an adult. On cross-examination, he acknowledged that defendant's criminal history included a hit-and-run arrest. Subsequently, at defendant's request, the jury was instructed that defendant's conviction of misdemeanor hit and run was received in connection with Dr. Vicary's opinion of defendant's mental state and could be only be considered in assessing what weight you choose to give Dr. Vicary's opinion. [ķ] This misdemeanor is not violent criminal activity which can constitute an aggravating factor. Defendant contends that admission of this evidence amounted to improper impeachment. Alternatively, he contends the evidence should have been excluded pursuant to Evidence Code section 352. We do not agree. The evidence was admitted to impeach Dr. Vicary's testimony that defendant had no juvenile or adult convictions, to the extent that this conclusion reflected upon Dr. Vicary's opinion of defendant's mental state. As such, it was properly admitted. ( People v. Hendricks (1988) 44 Cal.3d 635, 642, 244 Cal.Rptr. 181, 749 P.2d 836 [Other crimes evidence may be used to impeach the testimony of an expert witness].) Furthermore, any possibility the jury might have misunderstood the purpose of this evidence was obviated by the limiting instruction, which we presume the jury understood and followed. ( People v. Harris, supra, 9 Cal.4th at p. 426, 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 200, 886 P.2d 1193.) Defendant's Evidence Code section 352 claim is forfeited by his failure to have made this objection, but even if he had, we would find no abuse of the trial court's considerable discretion in admitting the evidence. (See People v. Gionis (1995) 9 Cal.4th 1196, 1214, 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 456, 892 P.2d 1199.)