P. v. Godinez CA2/1
Defendant and appellant Hector Ramon Godinez contends that the trial court abused its discretion when, following the dismissal of gang enhancement allegations that initially accompanied the robbery, assault, and Vehicle Code violation charges against him, the court denied a motion to strike gang related testimony and exclude gang-related exhibits. Godinez contends that the gang-related evidence was irrelevant and unduly prejudicial, and that its admission rendered the trial fundamentally unfair. Godinez also contends that defense counsel’s failure to make additional efforts to exclude this evidence constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. We disagree.
Comments on P. v. Godinez CA2/1