Opinion ID: 1375029
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Denying Motion to Exclude Photographs of Murder Victims

Text: Over defendant's objection on grounds of prejudicial impact substantially exceeding probative value and cumulativeness (Evid. Code, § 352), the court admitted postmortem photographs of each victim. Some of them showed the victims at the murder scenes, while others were taken in the coroner's office. The court ordered certain photographs cropped before admission to minimize any unduly prejudicial effect, and excluded others entirely as cumulative. (39) Defendant contends that the admitted photographs lacked any probative value because the cause of death was never disputed, he offered to stipulate to certain details regarding the cause of death, and the coroner's testimony was sufficient to explain the cause of death in any event. In sum, he argues that the photographs were gruesome and that after seeing them, the jury no doubt felt compelled to convict someone.  The People respond in effect that all the photographs were probative of malice  i.e., they show an intent to kill and therefore express malice  and, because a clothesline was used to strangle Carter, photographs of his body, which show a cord wrapped around his neck, are probative of deliberation and premeditation. (See, e.g., People v. Garceau (1993) 6 Cal.4th 140, 180-181 [24 Cal. Rptr.2d 664, 862 P.2d 664] [photographs showing bodies' condition when found relevant to issue of malice]); People v. Raley, supra, 2 Cal.4th at pp. 896-897 [same].) The court had broad discretion in deciding whether to admit such evidence. ( People v. Raley, supra, 2 Cal.4th at p. 896.)