Can a partially unintelligible tape be excluded as evidence in a sexual assault case?

" 'A trial court has "considerable discretion" in determining the relevance of evidence. [Citation.] Similarly, the court has broad discretion under Evidence Code section 352 to exclude even relevant evidence if it determines the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by its possible prejudicial effects. [Citation.] An appellate court reviews a court's rulings regarding relevancy and admissibility under Evidence Code section 352 for abuse of discretion. [Citation.] We will not reverse a court's ruling on such matters unless it is shown ' "the trial court exercised its discretion in an arbitrary, capricious, or patently absurd manner that resulted in a manifest miscarriage of justice.' " ' " (People v. Jones (2017) 3 Cal.5th 583, 609.)

" '[A] tape recording may be admissible even if substantial portions of it are unintelligible." ' [Citation.] " ' " ' "[T]o be admissible, tape recordings need not be completely intelligible for the entire conversation as long as enough is intelligible to be relevant without creating an inference of speculation or unfairness." [Citations.]' [Citation.] [] Thus, a partially unintelligible tape is admissible unless the audible portions of the tape are so incomplete the tape's relevance is destroyed." ' " (People v.

Page 9

Jones, supra, 3 Cal.5th at p. 611.) "The fact [that] a tape recording 'may not be clear in its entirety does not of itself require its exclusion from evidence "since a witness may testify to part of a conversation if that is all he heard and it appears to be intelligible." ' " (People v. Polk (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 944, 953.)