# People v. Alcala

> California Supreme Court · August 23, 1984 · 36 Cal. 3d 604

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9627465

## Case

- **Full name:** The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RODNEY JAMES ALCALA, Defendant and Appellant; In Re RODNEY JAMES ALCALA on Habeas Corpus
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** August 23, 1984
- **Citations:** 36 Cal. 3d 604; 205 Cal. Rptr. 775; 685 P.2d 1126; 1984 Cal. LEXIS 206
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Mosk
- **Judges:** Grodin, Mosk
- **Cited by:** 214 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Superseded by statute, as recognized in People v. Falsetta.
- Negative treatments: 2
- Distinguished by: 1
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9627465

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- rejecting the contention the jury must be instmcted to distrust in-custody informant testimony

## Opinion text

MOSK, J.
I dissent.
I cannot conclude, with the assurance of my colleagues, that the admission of evidence of prior offenses committed by defendant was erroneous, or that *637 its admission requires reversal under People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836 [ 299 P.2d 243 ]. There were sufficient similarities in the prior offenses, all against female children, to permit their introduction on the issue of identity.
That the prior offenses against little girls did not result in a killing is not sufficient justification to find dissimilarity and to conclude that the trial court improperly exercised its discretion in admitting the evidence. (People v. McCarty (1958) 164 Cal.App.2d 322, 326 [ 330 P.2d 484 ].)
I would affirm the conviction on the ground that there has been no miscarriage of justice. (Cal. Const., art. VI, § 13.)
Respondent’s petition for a rehearing was denied October 4, 1984. Mosk, J., and Lucas, J., were of the opinion that the petition should be granted.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9627465. Public record. Not legal advice.