Opinion ID: 1170008
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Alleged erroneous admission of morgue photographs

Text: [18] At the conclusion of the defendant's case the court admitted into evidence two colored morgue photographs for the purpose of establishing the trajectory of the bullet and the distance between the gun and the victim. We cannot accept defendant's contention that introduction of the photographs constituted prejudicial error. In People v. Schader, supra, 62 Cal.2d 716, 733, we stated: The pictures showed a considerable amount of blood and were unpleasant to view, but they did have evidentiary value; the question whether such value outweighed any possible prejudicial effect rested within the sound discretion of the trial court. ( People v. Arguello (1964) 61 Cal.2d 210, 213 [37 Cal. Rptr. 601, 390 P.2d 377]; People v. Henderson (1963) 60 Cal.2d 482, 495 [35 Cal. Rptr. 77, 386 P.2d 677].) Although we are not automatically bound by our prior ruling, since the instant trial was not a mere replay of the first trial (see People v. Hillery (1967) 65 Cal.2d 795, 803 [56 Cal. Rptr. 280, 423 P.2d 208]), we reach the same conclusion. In evaluating defendant's contention that the shooting occurred accidentally, the path of the bullet and the distance of the weapon from the victim's neck, in addition to expert medical testimony, constituted facts of some slight evidentiary value.