## Facts

- Logan Scott McClelland went with his father and brother to an auto-repair shop near Monument, Colorado, after their truck had a low tire.
- McClelland’s father complained to the shop manager about a mechanic, B.B., who was loudly cursing; B.B. had been drinking at work and was sent home.
- As the McClellands drove toward the exit after paying, B.B. was outside; witnesses described him as angry, and coworkers anticipated a confrontation.
- An altercation occurred between B.B. and McClelland’s father; accounts differed about who initiated contact and the level of threat.
- McClelland shot B.B., killing him; McClelland asserted self-defense and defense of others based on his perception that force was necessary to protect himself and his father.
- At trial, the prosecution introduced three “in-life” photographs showing B.B. smiling at family events and, in opening and closing, described B.B. in terms of family relationships and personal interests.
- The jury acquitted McClelland of second-degree murder but convicted him of reckless manslaughter, and the trial court entered judgment on the verdict.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting “in-life” photographs of the victim and allowing related argument that risked appealing to sympathy during the guilt phase.
2. Whether any error in admitting the photographs and argument was harmless or required reversal.

## Decision

- The Colorado Court of Appeals reversed the reckless manslaughter conviction and remanded for a new trial.
- The court held the trial court abused its discretion by admitting the three “in-life” photographs because their limited probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
- The court held the error was not harmless given the contested self-defense issues, conflicting testimony, and the likelihood that the evidence affected the verdict.

## Legal Principles

- Evidence must be relevant (CRE 401), and otherwise admissible evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice (CRE 403).
- “In-life” victim photographs are improper at the guilt phase when they have minimal relevance to a disputed material issue and primarily serve to humanize the victim or generate sympathy.
- When the victim’s identity and the fact of death are not genuinely contested, multiple posed family photographs offered only to show the victim was once alive have slight probative value.
- In close cases turning on juror evaluations of reasonableness and credibility (including self-defense and defense of others), sympathy-inducing victim evidence is more likely to affect the verdict and thus is less likely to be harmless.

## Conclusion

Because the “in-life” photographs and the prosecutor’s accompanying victim-humanizing statements invited a sympathy-based decision on contested self-defense questions, and because the case was closely tried on credibility and reasonableness, the evidentiary error was not harmless; the conviction was reversed and the matter was remanded for a new trial.


People v. McClelland, 350 P.3d 976 (Colo. App. 2015)