Can the prosecution ask an expert whether a crime was committed for the benefit of a gang?

Defendant claims that, under People v. Vang, supra, 52 Cal.4th 1038, the prosecution is limited to asking the expert to assume hypothetical facts in reaching an opinion about whether a crime benefitted a gang but cannot question the expert using evidence presented in the defendant's specific case. In Vang, the prosecutor asked the expert a hypothetical question which was identical to the evidence presented at trial: "'Based on the facts of that hypothetical, do you have an opinion as to whether this particular crime was committed for the benefit of and [in] association with or at the direction of the Tiny Oriental Crips street gang?'" The expert responded in the affirmative, gave his opinion, and explained the basis for that opinion. (Id. at p. 1043.) Presented with additional facts based on the evidence, the expert also called the attack "gang motivated." (Ibid.) The defendant claimed that the hypothetical was objectionable

Page 16