Can a jury infer a motive for a murder defendant's bad temper?

Defendant maintains this "propensity" evidence was improperly admitted in violation of Evidence Code section 1101. But this argument ignores the purpose for which the evidence was admitted: his motive for committing the murder. As such it is expressly permitted under Evidence Code section 1101, subdivision (b): "Nothing in this section prohibits the admission of evidence that a person committed a crime . . . when relevant to prove some fact []such as motive . . . ." Evidence of defendant's bad temper and angry moods was relevant to show an alternative motive for the murder. Evidence of a mental illness would help to explain these characteristics. We realize that there may be a violation of due process where there are `"no permissible inferences a jury may draw from"' erroneously admitted evidence. (McKinney v. Rees (9th Cir. 1993) 993 F.2d 1378, 1384, italics omitted.) But because the evidence was relevant and permitted the jury to infer a motive for the murder, due process was not offended.