P. v. Cunningham CA2/5
When police officers responded to a 911 domestic violence call, they encountered defendant and appellant John Cunningham (defendant) at the scene, partially hidden behind some trees. Unbeknownst to the officers when they arrived, defendant had not committed the reported incident of domestic violence, but he had very recently committed identity theft. Defendant belligerently refused to comply with certain of the officers’ commands, and a scuffle ensued when the officers detained him. Defendant was charged with resisting-arrest-related offenses and with identity theft, and he was tried on all the charges in a single action and convicted on several counts. We consider whether the trial court prejudicially erred by joining the identity theft charges for trial with the resisting arrest charges, and by permitting the prosecution to introduce testimony regarding defendant’s methamphetamine use as evidence of motive.
Comments on P. v. Cunningham CA2/5