CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Character and Reputation Evidence
......To Prove Conduct & Prior Bad Acts
.........Admis. When Relv to Prove Fact In Issue
............Admissible to Show Motive
 31 Cards On This Topic:
  • Character evidence admissible to prove motive.
  • Evidence of other crimes admissible to prove fact in issue. (Fed. Rules of Evid.)
  • To extent being shot by police was deceased's plan, intent, or motive, evidence supporting "suicide by cop" was admissible under FRE 404(b).
  • No abuse of discretion in denying co-D’s severance motion where evidence of D’s misconduct would have been relevant to co-D’s motive even if co-D were granted a separate trial.
  • Allowing brief testimony that D was often unemployed, as motive for burglary/murder, was harmless error where ample other evidence supported finding that D broke into V's residence to steal drugs or money.
  • Harmless error to allow DA to present evidence during its case-in-chief that rape/robbery D was unemployed and living on his girlfriend's monthly $700 income.
  • D's prior 1976 crimes properly admitted as evidence of motive to sexually assault Polly even where motive not an element of D's crimes as "absence of apparent motive may make proof of the essential elements less persuasive."
  • No abuse of discretion in admitting testimony of human resources worker that D said in 1986 he would kill her and other workers; this was powerful evidence of long-standing motive and intent re 1988 killings.
  • Motion to sever properly denied where attempted murder evidence would have been cross-admissible in separate trial of murder count, to prove D's motive for killing V, and establish special circumstance of witness-killing.
  • No error in not excluding evidence of D's prior abuse of V under EC 352 where stmts substantially probative of D's premeditation and motive for killing her and any prejudice limited by jury instructions.
  • No error in admitting rebuttal evidence of D’s brief termination from sheriff’s dept. as a result of prostitute’s complaint on theory D had a motive to kill another prostitute.
  • No abuse of discretion in allowing uncharged acts of domestic and other violence where they showed escalating campaign to retaliate against D’s estranged wife and family for marital breakup.
  • Evidence of D’s uncharged assault and theft near time of murder-robbery relevant for nonpropensity purposes of showing D’s motive and intent in attacking V, uses expressly permitted by EC 1101 (b).
  • Trial ct. properly admitted limited evidence of drug use while excluding general drug evidence not connected with crime, where limited evidence directly relevant on question of D’s preexisting motive to steal.
  • No error, or harmless error, to admit evidence of husband killer's bad character; her lavish lifestyle after H's death relevant to prove financial motive for killing him.
  • Check admitted into evidence was relevant to DA's financial gain theory of case—that it was admitted without proper foundation was harmless error.
  • Evidence of D's participation in previous swap meet robbery properly admitted under EC 1101 (b) on issues of identity, intent and motive re murder at later swap meet.
  • D's assault of W, foiled by V, probative on issue of motive as it precipitated breakdown of D's relationship with V and supported theory D tortured and killed V for revenge.
  • W's testimony re D's sabotage of V's jeep on day of murder and D's belief V "turned him in," relevant to motive and supported DA's theory that D tortured and killed V for revenge.
  • No abuse of discretion in admitting gang evidence where relevant to D's intent and motive to aid and abet V's murder, or an offense of which V's murder was a natural and probable consequence.
  • Evidence D deceived murdered W with extramarital affairs, and DA's cross-exam about D's other affairs was relevant, especially where D put own credibility in issue.
  • In felony hit and run/manslaughter case, erroneous admission of prior flight evidence to show motive and common plan did not result in miscarriage of justice.
  • Character evidence admissible to prove motive.
  • No error to deny D's motion to exclude gang evidence where it was relevant to motive and identity, tending to show V appeared to be member of deadly rival Crips.
  • Prior threat to kill anyone who got in his way admissible to show D's motive to kill in specific instance where other evidence placed victim within scope of general threat.
  • D's membership in gang properly admitted where relevant to establish motive for murders.
  • Where evidence of gang activity or membership is important to the motive, it can be introduced even if prejudicial.
  • Evidence D was narcotics user properly admitted to prove motive for burglary of sister's house; had direct probative value.
  • Evidence of prior assaults on victim admissible re motive and identity.
  • Gang-related testimony in prison murder not inadmissible character evidence as it did not relate to "other crimes" and fell within motive exception.
  • Cases discussing various aspects of use of prior bad acts to show motive.


    •