Annin

People v. Annin

Good Law
117 Cal. App. 4th 591·15 Cal. Rptr. 3d 278
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 5, 2004A099237California7,708 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stein, J.

Raymond Annin (appellant) appeals his conviction for violating Penal Code section 290, subdivision (f)(1). The court also found true allegations that he had four prior convictions qualifying as strikes under the “Three Strikes” law, and found true an enhancement pursuant to section 667.5. The court denied his motion to strike one or more of the strike priors, and sentenced him to a term of 25 years to life, plus one year for the enhancement.

Appellant raises numerous issues on appeal, including challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, several claims of instructional error, ineffective assistance of counsel, and due process and equal protection challenges to section 290. He also contends that his sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the state and federal Constitutions. We shall affirm the judgment.

FACTS

On November 8, 1998, appellant was released on parole. He registered as a sex offender in Redwood City on November 10, 1998, and last registered on August 26, 1999. During that time period, he filed 10 forms in Redwood City to report a change of address, or that he was within the jurisdiction as a transient, meaning that he had no address. On…

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.