Wilson

Defendant was charged in an amended information with three counts of violating section 288a of the Penal Code (oral copulation) and one count of violating section 261, subdivision 1 of the Penal Code (statutory rape). The information alleged that defendant had suffered a previous conviction of violating section 476a of the Penal Code (issuing checks without sufficient funds) and had served a term of imprisonment in the state prison.

Defendant admitted the prior conviction and the substantive charges were tried to a jury. The result was a conviction on all counts. The jury recommended a state prison sentence for the rape.

This appeal from the judgment of conviction sets forth four contentions of error, none of which is meritorious.

Factual Background

The principal witnesses for the prosecution were Joan, age 14, and Mary, age 19, both of whom were defendant’s stepdaughters.

We find it unnecessary to recount in great detail the testimony which led to defendant’s conviction.

The facts viewed in the light most favorable to the judgment were as follows:

The incredibly bizarre circumstances in which these young girls were victimized deserves exposition.

The family…