You are on page 1of 5
oo 3 Dae 10 1 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 2. 22, 23 24 25 7 28 COPY Edward Chemoff, Esq. STRADLEY, CHERNOFF & ALFORD 917 Franklin Street, Suite 600 Houston, Texas 77002 CONFORMED COPY OF ORIGINAL FILED Nareg Gourjian, Esq. (SBN 221861) ‘Los Angeles Superior Court GOURJIAN LAW GROUP, P.C. 101 North Brand Boulevard, Suite 1220 APR O7 2011 Glendale, California 91203 John &. Liens, easuune Ofc ‘Telephone: (818) 956-0100 ‘Deputy Facsimile: (818) 96-0123 bd Awomeys for Defendant CONRAD R. MURRAY SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF 10S ANGELES ‘THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF Case No, SA073164 CALIFORNIA, Plainti, NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF vs. DEFENDANT CONRAD R. MURRAY'S CHILDREN AND EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR CONRAD R. MURRAY, (Cal, vid. Code 88 360, 352 and 402) Defendant. po TO: STEVE COOLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY; and his deputies David B. Walgren and Deborah 8. Brazil; AND ‘TO: CLERK OF THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant Conrad R. Murray, by and through counsel, hereby moves this Court for an order excluding any reference, mention, evidence or testimony concerning Defendant Conrad R. Murray's children and his extramarital affair with Nicole Alvarez pursuant to Evidence Code Sections 350, 362 and 402. ae NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT C, MURRAY'S CHILDREN AND EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR © @ 3 oo A wD 10 1 12 13 14 15 16 v7 18 19 20 2 23 24 25 ‘This motion is made on the grounds that such evidence related to Dr. Murray's children and extramarital affair is irrelevant and highly prejudicial ‘The motion is based on this notice of motion, the memorandum of points and authorities served and filed herewith, the pleadings and records on file herein, and upon such other and further argument as may be presented to the Court at the hearing of this, matter. Dated: April 5, 2011 Respectfully submitted, Attorheys for Conrad R. Murray OF DEFENDANT C. MURRAY'S CHILDREN AND EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR oo 3 oo © 10 av 12, 13 14 16 16 Ww 18 19 20 a 22, 23 24 28 26 a7 28 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES I INTRODUCTION ‘The prosecution seeks to introduce evidence related to Dr. Murray's children, and his purported sexual relations with Nicole Alvarez and other women. Certainly, this evidence hnas no rational bearing on any issue in this matter and is presented merely to harass and discredit Dr. Murray. This Court should exclude this evidence at trial because it is irrelevant and will substantially prejudice Dr. Murray's defense, A party may preclude or limit the introduction of evidence by presenting a motion in Jimine to the trial court. (Cal. Evid. Code §§ 350, 362.) In particular, an in imine motion is essential to prevent the presentation of inadmissible testimony which may prejudice the jury. (Hyatt v, Sierra Boat Co. (1978) 79 Cal. App.3d 32, 937 ("It}he advantage of such motions is to avoid the obviously futile attempt to ‘unring the bell’ in the event a motion to strike is granted”) I. EVIDENCE OF DR. MURRAY'S CHILDREN AND PURPORTED AFFAIR Is NOT RELEVANT UNDER EVIDENCE CODE SECTION 350 AND IS UNDULY PREJUDICIAL UNDER EVIDENCE CODE SECTION 382. Evidence Code Sections 350 and 362 allow only relevant evidence and give the court discretion to exclude evidence when its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will (a) necessitate undue consumption of time or (b) create substantial danger of undue prejudice, of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury. ‘The prosecution's case involves the treatment and care of Michael Jackson provided by Dr. Murray. It is not about the existence and number of ohildren Dr, Murray has, ot about his personal sexual relationship with women. ‘The prosecution seeks to introduce this, evidence solely to inflame the passions of the jury. Such evidence is not relevant under NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO B3 OF DEFENDANT C. MURRAY'S CHILDREN AND EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR © er ea a oN 10 1 12 18 14 15 16 Ww 18 19 20 21 23 26 26 27 Evid. Code § 360 and should be excluded under Evid. Code § 362, as its admission would unduly prejudice the jury and confuse the issues of this case, In. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Dr. Murray respectfully requests that any reference, mention, evidence or testimony of his sexual relations or purported affairs, and his children be excluded from trial. Dated: April 5, 2011 Respectfully submitted, atedineys fpf De Gadant Conrad R. Musray oe NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT C. MURRAY'S CHILDREN AND EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR PROOF OF SERVICE BY PERSONAL DELIVERY STATE OF CALIFORNIA : COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, : 1 am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of Califomnia, Tam over the age of 18 and nota par) to the within action. My business address is 101 N. Brand Bivd., Suite 1220, Glendale, CA 91203. On April, 2011, I served on interested pasties in said action the within: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT CONRAD R. MURRAY'S FINANCIAL CONDITION by hand delivering a true copy thereof to: David Walgren, D.D.A. Office of the Los Angeles County District Attorney 210 W. Temple St., 17" Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012 Lam readily familiar with this firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business, 1 am aware that on motion of patty served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is mose than I day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on pal, 2011, at Glendale, California. Nareg Gourjian, (ype or print name) ‘Sighawure) ‘NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT C. MURRAY'S CHILDREN AND EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR