CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Relevance
......Demonstrative Evidence
.........Victim Impact Evidence
............Non-photographic Evidence
15 Cards On This Topic:

Trial ct. properly admitted VI testimony as to daughter hearing the news her relatives' deaths, her shock at seeing the bloody crime scene, and other Ws' testimony about her mentally disabled brother's emotional reaction to the scene.

Victim impact evidence properly admitted by a few relatives of each V concerning Vs' character and the impact of their deaths upon families—evidence neither excessive nor irrelevant.

Allowing murder V's family members to testify as to how the manner of her death affected them and to allow surviving Vs to testify regarding impact of D's crimes on them was proper victim impact testimony.

Sheriff's testimony on impact of deputy's murder on dept. was proper VI testimony, which is not limited to grief, but may show specific harm caused by D and encompasses the spectrum of human responses.

Testimony of 9-yr.-old shooting V's teacher, grandmother, and sister, and a videotape of a family trip to Disneyland properly admitted victim impact evidence.

No error in admitting 911 tape of teenaged V screaming in background upon finding mother's body where it showed immediate impact and harm caused by D's criminal conduct on surviving V; relevant under PC 190.3(a).

No victim-impact error in allowing V's wife's testimony at guilt phase where it scarcely touched upon V's family life and did not relate the effect of D's acts upon family members.

Victim impact testimony re circumstances in which V and his family lived in Mexico and V's actions in U.S. to ameliorate his family's poverty was relevant to show impact of murder on his family.

Circumstances of uncharged violent criminal conduct, including its direct impact on the victim(s) of that conduct, admissible under PC 190.3 factor (b).

V's cousins' penalty testimony and short recitation as to effect of V's death on family admissible where short, focused on expected emotions and not unduly inflammatory.

V's mother's victim impact testimony was what would be expected in any child murder case and not excludable as inflammatory under Payne and Stanley, which contemplated extreme case dissimilar to this.

Properly admitted victim impact testimony included: that murder V taught Bible school, testimony re the brutality of the killings, and testimony of Vs' friends.

Trial court properly admitted testimony of V's family members where it corroborated D's confession, was relevant, filled in chronology and was brief, factual and unemotional.

Asking death penalty jury to exercise sympathy for Vs and families met standards for admissible victim impact evidence.

Victim impact evidence in form of V's hopes and fears near time of her death were relevant to penalty determination, as were V's personal characteristics, including her age.