What is the test for admitting evidence of prior criminal convictions?

In exercising their discretion to admit evidence of prior convictions, trial courts are to be "guided but not bound" (People v. Clair, supra, 2 Cal.4th at p. 654) by the following four factors: (1) whether the prior conviction reflects adversely on the witness's honesty or veracity; (2) whether the prior conviction was near or remote in time; (3) whether the prior conviction is similar to the present offense; and, (4) the potential effect on the defendant's failure to testify, (People v. Green, supra, 34 Cal.App.4th at p. 182). "The first factor goes to admissibility of the prior convictions, which determination the trial court must first reach before exercising its discretion based on the remaining factors. [Citations.]" (Ibid.)

Page 9

Here, defendant does not dispute that his prior theft convictions were admissible as probative to his credibility. (See People v. Mendoza (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 918, 925 ["California courts have repeatedly held that prior convictions for burglary... and other various theft-related crimes are probative on the issue of the defendant's credibility"].) Rather, defendant asserts that the third and fourth factors listed above "weighed heavily in favor of exclusion of the prior convictions: similarity of the prior to the present offense and the effect on the defendant's decision to testify."