Opinion ID: 2507905
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Admission of Autopsy and Crime Scene Photographs.

Text: Defendant next contends the trial court erred by admitting into evidence nine crime scene and autopsy photographs in violation of Evidence Code section 352, the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and federal and state constitutional rights to an impartial jury and to due process of law. These claims have no merit. The prosecution initially sought to introduce 181 photographic slides of the crime scene and victims; nine were admitted into evidence. The slides in question show crime scene and autopsy photographs of the two victims. Under section 352, it is proper to admit relevant evidence when the probative value of that evidence is not substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect. ( People v. Scheid (1997) 16 Cal.4th 1, 13, 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 348, 939 P.2d 748.) The trial court's decision is reviewed for abuse of discretion. ( People v. Hardy (1992) 2 Cal.4th 86, 199-200, 5 Cal.Rptr.2d 796, 825 P.2d 781.) The record reveals that the court carefully reviewed the submitted photographs and selected just nine of the original 181 slides proposed by the prosecution to be introduced into evidence. These nine slides depict certain key aspects of evidence that were in contention at trial. The slides of April illustrate where the body was found, aspects of how the crime was committed, and the location and nature of some of the wounds. They are probative of whether April was raped because they illustrate blood flow evidence and thus whether April was alive at the time of penetration. The slides indicate as well the manner in which April was raped, the position of her sweat shirt on the body, and the placement of blood clots. Also visible is a defensive wound on April's left wrist, illustrating her attempts to fight off defendant's attack. The slides of Mary show the manner and severity of the wounds to her neck, and illustrate the pathologist's testimony regarding the type of weapon that may have caused the wounds and whether the knife point may have broken off. The nine slides admitted corroborate the testimonial evidence and were relevant to the ultimate determination of guilt. (See People v. Raley (1992) 2 Cal.4th 870, 914, 8 Cal.Rptr.2d 678, 830 P.2d 712.) The slides were neither particularly gruesome nor inflammatory, and the record shows that the trial court properly weighed their probative value and prejudicial effect. The court did not abuse its discretion under Evidence Code section 352 in concluding the probative value of this evidence was not substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect. ( People v. Sanchez (1995) 12 Cal.4th 1, 64, 47 Cal.Rptr.2d 843, 906 P.2d 1129.) Nor was there cumulative prejudice to defendant. As we stated in People v. Price (1991) 1 Cal.4th 324, 441, 3 Cal. Rptr.2d 106, 821 P.2d 610, We have often rejected the argument that photographs of a murder victim should be excluded as cumulative if the facts for which the photographs are offered have been established by testimony.