What are the deficiencies in the testimony of the victim's nephew and the expert witness?

The deficiencies in the testimony of the victims were well known to the jury, having been ably presented by trial counsel for defendant. Defendant here seeks to reassert those deficiencies in an effort to have his convictions overturned. This he cannot do. It was for the jury to determine whether those deficiencies were sufficient to reject the victims' identification of him as the robber. The jury chose not to. Despite the deficiencies, there is substantial evidence to support the verdicts. Conflicts in the evidence, to which defendant calls our attention, are to be resolved in favor of the verdicts. (People v. Wader (1993) 5 Cal.4th 610, 640.) Obviously, the jurors believed the victims over the first victim's nephew and the defense expert witness. This was their prerogative.

4. Discovery Violation