Duens

People v. Duens

Good Law
134 Cal. Rptr. 341·1976 Cal. App. LEXIS 2072·64 Cal. App. 3d 310
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 29, 1976Crim. 28591California1,386 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jefferson, J.

By information, defendant was charged with the offense of assault with intent to commit rape, in violation of Penal Code section 220. Defendant entered a plea of not guilty.

Thereafter, defendant waived his right to a jury trial and consented to a court trial with a partial submission of the case on the preliminary hearing transcript. The parties stipulated that the testimony contained in the preliminary transcript and exhibits received at the preliminary hearing could be entered into evidence at the court trial. Defendant also waived his right to confront and cross-examine witnesses who had testified at the preliminary hearing. These witnesses were Lorraine Croft, Claudia Caspary and Thomas Hembree. Both defendant and the prosecution reserved the right to present additional evidence at the trial.

An interpreter was present at the trial, as defendant spoke Spanish. The prosecution presented the testimony of one witness, Floyd Walizer, a former police officer. Defendant testified in his own defense. The prosecution also presented a rebuttal witness, Claudia Caspary.

Defendant was found guilty of attempted assault with intent to commit rape, purportedly in violation of…

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.