In People v. Barnwell (2007) 41 Cal.4th 1038, the Supreme Court found that the trial court had committed harmless error in admitting evidence that approximately a year prior to the charged murder, the defendant possessed a firearm that the facts reasonably demonstrated could not have been the murder weapon. (Id. at p. 1044.) The court stated, "When the prosecution relies on evidence regarding a specific type of weapon, it is error to admit evidence that other weapons were found in the defendant's possession, for such evidence tends to show not that he committed the crime, but only that he is the sort of person who carries deadly weapons." (Id. at p. 1056.) Further, the evidence was admitted specifically to demonstrate the defendant's "'propensity to own or carry that type of weapon.'" (Ibid.) In Barnwell, the Supreme Court concluded that the admission of evidence regarding the defendant's prior gun possession was error, precisely "because the prosecution did not claim the weapon found by Officer Flores a year prior to the murder was the murder weapon." (Ibid.)