People v. Mendoza CA3

BACKGROUND

When Doe was around four years old, Mendoza started dating her mother. When Doe was 12, she moved to the Sacramento area to live with her mother and Mendoza, whom she saw as a father figure. When she was 13, Mendoza began sexually abusing her. A search of Mendoza’s cell phone by police uncovered images of prepubescent girls and their vaginas, and at Mendoza’s trial an expert witness opined that the images were child pornography. An amended information charged Mendoza with numerous felony offenses, including four counts of committing a forcible lewd act with a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (b)(1)),1 and possession of images depicting a minor engaging in sexual conduct (§ 311.11, subd. (a)), as defined in section 311.4, subdivision (d). After the parties presented their evidence, the trial court instructed the jury with CALCRIM No. 301—that the testimony of a single witness can prove any fact, provided jurors carefully consider all the evidence before reaching that conclusion. The court also instructed, under CALCRIM No. 1190, that a conviction for a sexual assault offense may be based solely on the testimony of the complaining witness. The trial…