P. v. Phillips CA1/2
Defendant Carl Anthony Phillips appeals from a judgment of conviction, entered after a jury found him guilty of two counts of auto burglary. Defendant argues the trial court erred by admitting prejudicial propensity evidence that he had stolen items from a vehicle in an uncharged prior act the previous year, and by admitting hearsay statements by witnesses who identified him as the burglar in the present case. We conclude the trial court acted within its discretion to admit the uncharged prior act evidence and reject defendant’s hearsay arguments because either the evidence was not hearsay or, assuming it was, its admission was harmless. Therefore, we affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Phillips CA1/2