Armbruster

People v. Armbruster

Good Law
163 Cal. App. 3d 660·1985 Cal. App. LEXIS 1524·210 Cal. Rptr. 11
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 14, 1985Crim. 12901California1,506 words

Opinion

Opinion

Puglia, J.

A jury convicted defendant of forcible rape (Pen. Code, § 261, subd. (2)), and the trial court imposed the middle term of six years in state prison. On appeal, defendant challenges the constitutionality of Penal Code section 1112 which prohibits the trial court from ordering a victim in a sexual assault prosecution to submit to a psychiatric or psychological examination for the purpose of assessing his or her credibility. He also contends the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction and that the court improperly weighed and determined aggravating and mitigating circumstances in imposing the middle term. These contentions are without merit and we shall affirm the judgment. Inasmuch as part II and part III dealing with sufficiency of the evidence and the challenge to the sentence respectively do not meet the standards for publication, they are not to be published (rule 976.1, Cal. Rules of Court).

Beulah H., age 9, testified that in November 1982, the defendant forcibly raped her. A police officer recounted certain postarrest admissions defendant made to him. The only defense witness was Dr. Judy Cook, who examined Beulah on December 29, 1982. She did not observe…

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.