Can a defendant exclude evidence of his membership of a criminal gang?

We have recognized that admission of evidence of a criminal defendant's gang membership creates a risk the jury will improperly infer the defendant has a criminal disposition and is therefore guilty of the offense charged. (People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 922, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93, citing People v. Pinholster (1992) 1 Cal.4th 865, 945, 4 Cal.Rptr.2d 765, 824 P.2d 571.) As defendant points out, evidence of a defendant's criminal disposition is inadmissible to prove he committed a specific criminal act. (Evid.Code, 1101.) Moreover, even where gang membership is relevant, because it may have a highly inflammatory impact on the jury, trial courts should carefully scrutinize such evidence before admitting it. (People v. Champion, supra, 9 Cal.4th at p. 922, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93.)

The trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to exclude gang evidence. As defendant acknowledges, in a gang-related case, gang evidence is admissible if relevant to motive or identity, so long as its probative value is not outweighed by its prejudicial effect. (People v. Champion, supra, 9 Cal.4th at pp. 922-923, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93.) Gang evidence in this case was relevant to both motive and identity.