Opinion ID: 2600593
Heading Depth: 6
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Other potential suspects

Text: Defendant sought to introduce evidence concerning a Phil P., 40 to 45 years of age, who resided at the Rimrock Apartments. Steve Pizzo, who lived in the Rimrock Apartments with his wife Mabel and daughter Carrie, assertedly was prepared to testify that the day after Tahisha disappeared, Mr. Pizzo told the police that two weeks earlier, Phil P. had asked Carrie, who then was 11 years of age, to accompany Phil to the desert. According to defense investigator Ron Hawkins, Carrie would testify concerning Phil's invitation and her mother's refusal to allow her to go with Phil. Carrie would further testify that Phil rarely was in the company of the adult residents, and instead spent his time with the children, including Tahisha, in the playground area of the apartment complex. Phil sometimes attempted to teach the children to play tennis, and when he taught a child how to swing a tennis racket, he would put his arms around the child from behind the child. Carrie provided this information to the police the day after Tahisha disappeared. Defendant also sought to introduce evidence establishing that two days after Tahisha disappeared, Brian Z. was arrested by a patrol officer for exposing himself and masturbating near the Rimrock Apartments. Detective Franey contacted Detective Griego at approximately 3:30 p.m. on Sunday, April 25, concerning the arrest, and asked Griego to proceed to an automobile towing company and check the tire pattern on Brian's vehicle. At approximately 5:15 p.m., Franey and Griego interviewed Brian and checked the pattern on the soles of his shoes. The trial court excluded the proffered evidence, because it did not link either of these men to the crime and hence was incapable of raising a reasonable doubt as to defendant's guilt. ( People v. Hall (1986) 41 Cal.3d 826, 833 [226 Cal.Rptr. 112, 718 P.2d 99] ( Hall) . ) The court added that, assuming the evidence regarding Phil and Brian was of some marginal relevance, pursuant to Evidence Code section 352 the probative value of the evidence was outweighed by its undue prejudice.