People v. Perry

California Court of Appeal

People v. Perry

104 Cal. App. 3d 268, 163 Cal. Rptr. 522, 1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 1674

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedApril 7, 1980

DocketCrim. 19485

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 104 Cal. App. 3d 268 (People v. Perry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Perry, 104 Cal. App. 3d 268, 163 Cal. Rptr. 522, 1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 1674 (Cal. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinions

Opinion

CHRISTIAN, J.

Cornelius Perry appeals from a judgment of imprisonment which was rendered after a jury found him guilty of assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)).

Appellant followed and attacked a young woman who was walking in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. Appellant choked and struck the victim and banged her head against trees. The victim cried out for help, a man came up, and appellant fled. The victim identified appellant at trial from his general appearance and from a curved scar on his forehead.

Jacques Cusin, a teacher who had been supervising a soccer game nearby, had seen appellant a few minutes earlier. When Cusin saw what [270]*270was happening, he chased appellant. Police officers joined the chase and appellant was captured. The victim immediately identified him.

At trial the defense offered to prove that one Mathew Wolf had robbed and raped a woman in Golden Gate Park three years earlier and that Wolf had robbed and raped another woman in the same park about an hour before the charged offense. The court examined a photograph of Wolf and determined that “except for the race of the man there is nothing similar” before rejecting the offer. Appellant contends that the ruling was error. On the contrary, it was a proper exercise of the court’s power, under Evidence Code section 352, to exclude evidence that has minimal probative value in comparison with its potential for uselessly prolonging a trial and confusing the issues. (See People v. Chapman (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 872, 881 [123 Cal.Rptr. 862]; People v. Arline (1970) 13 Cal.App.3d 200, 205 [91 Cal.Rptr. 520].)

The judgment is affirmed.

Caldecott, P. J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion

CHRISTIAN, J.

Cornelius Perry appeals from a judgment of imprisonment which was rendered after a jury found him guilty of assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)).

Appellant followed and attacked a young woman who was walking in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. Appellant choked and struck the victim and banged her head against trees. The victim cried out for help, a man came up, and appellant fled. The victim identified appellant at trial from his general appearance and from a curved scar on his forehead.

Jacques Cusin, a teacher who had been supervising a soccer game nearby, had seen appellant a few minutes earlier. When Cusin saw what [270]*270was happening, he chased appellant. Police officers joined the chase and appellant was captured. The victim immediately identified him.

At trial the defense offered to prove that one Mathew Wolf had robbed and raped a woman in Golden Gate Park three years earlier and that Wolf had robbed and raped another woman in the same park about an hour before the charged offense. The court examined a photograph of Wolf and determined that “except for the race of the man there is nothing similar” before rejecting the offer. Appellant contends that the ruling was error. On the contrary, it was a proper exercise of the court’s power, under Evidence Code section 352, to exclude evidence that has minimal probative value in comparison with its potential for uselessly prolonging a trial and confusing the issues. (See People v. Chapman (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 872, 881 [123 Cal.Rptr. 862]; People v. Arline (1970) 13 Cal.App.3d 200, 205 [91 Cal.Rptr. 520].)

The judgment is affirmed.

Caldecott, P. J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 Cal. App. 3d 268, 163 Cal. Rptr. 522, 1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 1674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-perry-calctapp-1980.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack