P. v. Maganda
A jury found Alejandro Maganda (Maganda) to be a sexually violent predator (SVP). He argues that the jury’s finding must be overturned for a number of reasons. Most of his arguments lack merit, but he is correct that the trial court erred in allowing the People’s experts to testify to case-specific facts that are inadmissible under People v. Sanchez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 665 (Sanchez). Because that testimony was prejudicial, we are compelled to reverse.
Comments on P. v. Maganda