Opinion ID: 2625337
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Doug Crew's testimony

Text: Defendant's stepbrother Doug Crew testified that defendant said to him: Doug, I've done so many things. I think I would like to kill someone, just to see if I could get away with it. Doug Crew further testified that defendant probably made the statement in April, May, or June of 1982. Defendant argues the trial court should have sustained his objection to the statement on the ground it was more prejudicial then probative because the statement made no reference to a specific victim and because it was too remote in time. A generic threat is admissible where other evidence brings the actual victim within the scope of the threat. ( People v. Rodriguez (1986) 42 Cal.3d 730, 757, 230 Cal.Rptr. 667, 726 P.2d 113.) Here, other evidence brings Nancy within the scope of defendant's threat. Richard Elander testified that before May 1982, when he went to work at the ranch in Utah, defendant had talked about killing Nancy. Elander also testified that in August 1982, he and defendant discussed various ways of killing Nancy. The evidence of defendant's statement to his stepbrother, Doug, while damaging to defendant's case, was not unduly prejudicial. Prejudice for purposes of Evidence Code section 352 means evidence that tends to evoke an emotional bias against the defendant with very little effect on issues, not evidence that is probative of a defendant's guilt. ( People v. Karis, supra, 46 Cal.3d at p. 638, 250 Cal.Rptr. 659, 758 P.2d 1189.)