Barney

People v. Barney

Good Law
143 Cal. App. 3d 490·192 Cal. Rptr. 172·1983 Cal. App. LEXIS 1779
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 1983Crim. 11966California3,211 words

Opinion

Opinion

Blease, J.

Defendant was convicted by a jury of one act of incest with his daughter (Pen. Code, § 285) and two lewd acts upon the body of his granddaughter, a child under the age of 14 years (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)). He appeals from the judgment (order of probation). We reverse in part.

It is unnecessary to recapitulate the evidence in its sordid detail. The testimony shows defendant regularly had sexual intercourse with his three minor daughters and then with his granddaughter commencing when the girls were six or seven years old and terminating when they left his home. The pertinent details will be related in the course of the discussion.

Discussion

I

The act of incest charged occurred in Riverside County. Defendant was tried in Butte County. At the outset of trial, before jury selection, defendant unsuccessfully objected to trial on the incest charge because the venire excluded residents of the district in which the crime was alleged to have occurred, in violation of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. We are constrained to accept his argument.

The federal Constitution provides that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to…

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.