California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Johnson, 143 Cal.Rptr. 852, 77 Cal.App.3d 866 (Cal. App. 1978):
Before trial began, the court asked counsel for any further argument they wished to advance on the admissibility of evidence of threats. Defense counsel answered that all they were asking was that statements as to past events which caused the victim's state of mind be excluded and referred to the case of People v. Hamilton (1961) 55 Cal.2d 881, 13 Cal.Rptr. 649, 362 P.2d 473. The prosecutor stated that evidence of the victim's state of mind shortly before the killing would be relevant and that hearsay statements of the state of mind would be admissible under Evidence Code section 1250. Thereafter, the prosecutor questioned various witnesses, without objection, as to whether the victim had expressed a fear of appellant.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.