Can a defendant be impeached if he is convicted of auto theft?

The prosecution alleged, and defendant admitted, that on October 30, 1978, in Colorado, defendant was convicted of auto theft and escape, which are both felonies. Prior to trial, the prosecution stated that it wanted to use the auto theft conviction to impeach defendant if he should testify at trial. Although the trial judge recognized that the auto theft conviction was "very close" to the charged offense, he approved the prosecution's suggestion, which was based on the case of People v. Moultrie (1979) 99 Cal.App.3d 77, 160 Cal.Rptr. 51, that defendant could be asked whether he had ever been convicted of a felony involving theft. Defendant's counsel then told the court that he was advising defendant not to testify because of the ruling.

Evidence Code section 788 states, "For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, it may be shown that he has been convicted of a felony " In People v. Beagle (1972) 6 Cal.3d 441, 452-453, 99 Cal.Rptr. 313, 492 P.2d 1, however,

Page 535

The customary Beagle analysis considers four factors: (1) whether the crime of which the defendant was previously convicted is relevant to show a lack of credibility, (2) the nearness in time of the prior conviction to the present trial, (3) whether the prior conviction is for the same or similar conduct for which the defendant is on trial, and (4) the effect of the defendant's failure to testify for fear of being prejudiced by the admission into evidence of the prior conviction. (People v. Beagle, supra, 6 Cal.3d at p. 453, 99 Cal.Rptr. 313, 492 P.2d 1.)