What factors are considered in determining prejudice against a defendant for domestic violence?

Finally, the evidence of defendant's prior acts of domestic violence was significantly less inflammatory than the charged offense, which is yet another factor weighing in favor of its admission. (People v. Rucker (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 1107, 1119 ["[r]elevant factors in determining prejudice include whether the prior acts of domestic violence were more inflammatory than the charged conduct"].) The prior acts were recent, having occurred less than five years before the instant homicide. Testimony about the incidents did not involve an undue consumption of time, since it was limited to two incidents and two witnesses, consisting of approximately 20 pages of transcript for Morales and seven pages for the police officer. In addition, the trial court limited any prejudicial impact of the evidence and any risk of confusing the jury by instructing the jury with CALCRIM No. 852, as noted. (See People v. Reyes (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 246, 251 [jury instruction corresponding to consideration of evidence under Evid. Code, 1109 is constitutional]; People v. Pescador (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 252, 259-260 [CALJIC No. 2.50.02 [equivalent to CALCRIM No. 852] does not offend the due process clauses].)

"The record as a whole thus shows the trial court undertook a weighing of the probative value and the prejudicial effect of the evidence in making its ruling. [Citation.]" (People v. Hinton (2006) 37 Cal.4th at 839, 892.) The prejudice from

Page 16