People v. Darnell CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 5, 2026E083213California1,922 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

1 Darnell was tried on eight counts of rape of a child under age 14 (Pen. Code ,

§§ 261, subd. (a)(2) or (6), 269, subd. (a)(1), counts 1-8)), two counts of forcible oral

copulation of a child under age 14 (former § 288a (since renumbered as § 287), § 269,

subd. (a)(4), counts 9-10), one count of forcible sodomy of a child under age 14 (§§ 269,

subd. (a)(3), 286, subds. (c)(2), (3), (d), count 11), two counts of forcible sodomy of a

child age 14 or older (§ 286, subds. (c)(2)(C), counts 12-13), and one count of forcible

oral copulation of a child age 14 or older (§ 287, subd. (c)(2)(C), count 14).

At trial, Darnell’s stepdaughter testified as to approximately when certain acts

occurred, including those underlying count 1 and counts 11 through 14. Her testimony

about the acts underlying other counts was based on her general recollection of a lengthy

pattern of conduct. Thus, she testified that, beginning in 2013 and continuing until May

9, 2017, Darnell regularly had sexual intercourse with her: “When it first started, it would

be once or twice a week. As, I guess you can say, things got more comfortable, it became

about two times a day; three, four times a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.