California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Ainsworth, H039571 (Cal. App. 2015):
"Thus, as general rule, evidence of gang membership and activity is admissible if it is logically relevant to some material issue in the case, other than character evidence, is not more prejudicial than probative and is not cumulative. [Citation.] Consequently, gang evidence may be relevant to establish the defendant's motive, intent or some fact concerning the charged offenses other than criminal propensity as long as the probative value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect. [Citations.] 'Evidence of the defendant's gang affiliation . . . can help prove identity, motive, modus operandi, specific intent, means of applying force or fear, or other issues pertinent to guilt of the charged crime. [Citations.]' [Citation.] Nonetheless, even if the evidence is found to be relevant, the trial court must carefully scrutinize gang-related evidence before admitting it because of its potentially inflammatory impact on the jury. [Citations.]" (People v. Albarran, supra, 149 Cal.App.4th at pp. 223-224.) Evidence of defendant's gang membership, although relevant to motive or identity, creates a risk the jury will improperly infer that
Page 63
defendant has a criminal disposition and is therefore guilty of the charged offense and thus must be carefully scrutinized. (People v. Carter (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1166, 1194.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.