P. v. Scott & Gulledge
Appellants Patrick Gulledge and Malcolm Scott appeal their convictions for first degree murder. The murder was found to have been gang related and, with respect to Gulledge, to have been a hate crime. In his brief on appeal, Gulledge contends: (1) testimony that Gulledge had told his ex-girlfriend he would rob Mexicans if he needed cash should have been excluded as more prejudicial than probative; (2) evidence of witness intimidation should have been excluded because it was not attributable to him; and (3) the trial court erred in instructing the jurors they could infer guilt from efforts to intimidate witnesses, again because the intimidation referenced was not attributable to him.
Court agree the trial court erred in giving an implied malice instruction when implied malice was not at issue in the case, but conclude that the error was not prejudicial under the circumstances.
Comments on P. v. Scott & Gulledge