Opinion ID: 1985099
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Claim of Improper Admission of Photographs

Text: Appellant argues that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting certain photographs of Bird undergoing treatment in the hospital two to three days after the bathing incident and of Bird's body taken in the medical examiner's office. He contends that he offered to stipulate as to (1) identity and (2) the cause of Tweety Bird's death  i.e., that Tweety Bird was placed in a sitting position in a tub of hot water from which she suffered burns and that those burns resulted in her death. Furthermore, appellant asserts that the trial court admitted the photographs without weighing the probative value of the photographs versus their prejudicial effect, and certainly without considering their probative value in light of the proffered stipulations and the fact that the treating physician and Medical Examiner would also be testifying. [11] It is well-settled that the government has a large measure of discretion in deciding to accept or reject an offer to stipulate. United States v. Washington, 227 U.S.App.D.C. 184, 194, 705 F.2d 489, 499 (1983). The trial court's decision to admit relevant evidence over a stipulation should not be disturbed absent a showing of `grave abuse.' Id. at 499 (quoting United States v. Allen, 203 U.S.App.D.C. 17, 24, 629 F.2d 51, 58 (1980); United States v. Wright, 160 U.S.App.D.C. 57, 62, 489 F.2d 1181, 1186 (1973)). [T]he accepted rule that the prosecution is entitled to prove its case free from any defendant's option to stipulate the evidence away rests on good sense. Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172, 189, 117 S.Ct. 644, 136 L.Ed.2d 574 (1997). The government was entitled to use the pictures not only to establish the elements of second-degree murder ( i.e., malice), but also to establish the elements of cruelty to children ( i.e., intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly tortures, beats or otherwise willfully maltreats a child). [12] The trial court carefully examined the photographs, admitting some and excluding others. We are satisfied that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the photographs.