LOS ANGELES (AP) — A judge refused Monday to allow testimony about allegations of "sexual conduct" between two defendants and their dogs in a trial stemming from the fatal mauling of a San Francisco woman.

Superior Court Judge James Warren announced the decision after a daylong hearing behind closed doors. The judge, who did not elaborate on his ruling, immediately sealed the hearing's transcript.

On another matter, he overruled arguments by the defense seeking to keep the name of a prison gang, the Aryan Brotherhood, out of the case.

Warren said jurors would not be told that the gang advocates white supremacy, but they would learn that it is a prison gang and the defendants had connections with some of its members.

Prosecutors allege the defendants facilitated the gang's activities outside of prison and took part in a scheme to raise vicious, aggressive dogs. The defense denies the allegations.

Marjorie Knoller faces second-degree murder charges last year's mauling death of 33-year-old Diane Whipple because she was in the apartment hallway with the two dogs when they attacked.

Knoller and her husband, Robert Noel, face charges of involuntary manslaughter and keeping a mischievous dog that killed a human being.

The case was moved to Los Angeles due to extensive publicity in San Francisco. Jury selection was scheduled to continue Tuesday.

Attorney Nedra Ruiz, who represents Knoller, insisted her client was rescuing the two presa canario dogs from an abusive situation, not acting to benefit the gang. She called Whipple's death "was a tragic accident."

Attorney Bruce Hotchkiss, who represents Noel, said the prosecution would be unable to prove there was a scheme to raise vicious and aggressive dogs.

Prosecutor Jim Hammer said the dogs "were part of an elaborate scheme by the Aryan Brotherhood to market presa canarios, violent, aggressive, large dogs who can kill people."

The judge also ruled Monday that a series of letters from Knoller and Noel, who are both lawyers, to a prison inmate they have adopted are admissible even though they are written on the defendants' legal stationery.

He said the letters are personal and do not come under the heading of attorney-client privilege.

In still another ruling, Warren said he would allow testimony from a dog aggression expert who viewed a videotape of one of the dogs barking 111 times in one minute as a child walked by.