Herring

James William Herring appeals from a judgment following conviction by jury that he committed assault with intent to commit rape (Pen. Code, § 220), attempted rape (§§ 664/261, subd. (a)(2)), and sexual battery (§ 243.4), and the trial court’s finding that he had suffered a prior conviction for first degree burglary, a serious felony within the meaning of section 667, subdivision (a). The trial court sentenced him to prison for seven years.

He contends, among other matters, that the trial court committed reversible error in allowing the testimony of a psychologist regarding the victim’s mental retardation, and that the prosecutor’s remarks during final argument impugned the integrity of defense counsel and viciously attacked appellant’s character, thereby constituting misconduct requiring reversal.

We agree that reversal is required due to prosecutorial misconduct. It is, therefore, unnecessary to discuss the other matters raised with the exception of the issue of expert testimony which may occur on retrial.

Facts

Celia M. and appellant had known each other since 1987 when she and her parents lived across the street from him in Santa Barbara, California. Appellant’s…