Opinion ID: 2633286
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Questioning Regarding Defendant's Actions After Discovering Powell's Body

Text: Defendant testified that he did not remember washing any blood off of himself after finding Powell's body, but he admitted that he must have done so in the pool at the house under construction. The prosecutor repeatedly questioned defendant's memory in this area and finally asked him if he was afraid to admit to the jury that he washed the blood off of himself. The trial court overruled counsel's objection that the question was argumentative. On appeal, defendant contends the prosecutor engaged in misconduct because the question was argumentative and suggested he was trying to hide something even though he admitted he must have washed any blood off. We conclude no misconduct occurred. Evidence of defendant's specific conduct was relevant and admissible on the issue of his credibility. ( People v. Harris (1989) 47 Cal.3d 1047, 1080-1082, 255 Cal.Rptr. 352, 767 P.2d 619.) Thus, the prosecutor could properly focus on defendant's testimony regarding his specific actions after he left Powell's house to determine whether defendant's conduct was consistent with attempting to help Powell or with covering up evidence of her murder.