Butte

People v. Butte

Good Law
117 Cal. App. 4th 956·12 Cal. Rptr. 3d 221·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 538·2004 Daily Journal DAR 4571·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3238
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 14, 2004C041978California705 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sims, J.

A criminal information was filed charging defendant Raymond Harold Butte with 35 counts of sexual offenses perpetrated against his daughter R.W., beginning in 1979 and ending in 1998. A jury convicted him on 31 counts and deadlocked on the remaining four. The trial court sentenced him to a total prison term of 188 years and eight months.

In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we reverse 18 counts because, in light of Stogner v. California (2003) 539 U.S. 607 [ 156 L.Ed.2d 544 , 123 S.Ct. 2446 ], they are barred by the statute of limitations. In the published portion, we shall reject defendant’s contention that the information provided defendant with inadequate due process notice of the charges. We shall conclude that, because defendant waived a preliminary hearing, he has forfeited his claim of inadequate due process notice.

DEFENDANT’S CONTENTIONS

FACTS*

DISCUSSION

I-III*

IV

Defendant contends his demurrer to the information should have been sustained because the charges were too vague to address as they were alleged; according to defendant, this vagueness violated his rights to notice and due process. We agree with the People that defendant has forfeited this…

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.