Some of the evidence — much of which Schaefer argued was hearsay — dealt with racist and homophobic slurs Abulaban allegedly stated and his pornography viewing habits, the attorney argued.
Schaefer argued this evidence was improperly admitted and only served to portray Abulaban as a bad person, while having no relevance to what his state of mind was during the shooting.
“I think it would be very difficult for a jury to even view my client’s testimony objectively after hearing this kind of evidence,” she argued.
She also argued jurors were not properly instructed on how intoxication may have played a role in Abulaban’s mindset on the day of the killings. Jurors heard evidence of Abulaban’s cocaine addiction, as well as defense evidence regarding undiagnosed mental health issues and an abusive upbringing.
Deputy Attorney General Arlyn Escalante, arguing on behalf of the state, said any potential errors related to the character evidence admitted at trial were “demonstratively harmless,” especially amid “overwhelming, uncontroverted evidence of appellant’s guilt.”