Lopez

People v. Lopez

Good Law
123 Cal. App. 4th 1306·20 Cal. Rptr. 3d 801·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 1870·2004 Daily Journal DAR 13670·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10049
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 8, 2004H026297California6,506 words

Opinion

Concurring Opinion

Walsh, J.

I concur not only in the result but also in the reasoning in this case, with the exception of the discussion of People v. Chambless (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 773 [ 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 444 ] (Chambless). I agree with the majority that “substantial sexual conduct” includes masturbation accomplished through clothing. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600.1, subd. (a).) I write separately because Chambless presents a difficult definitional problem. In my view, the adoption of the phrase “any touching or contact, however slight, of the genitals” (Chambless, supra, at p. 783 ) suggests a doubtful minimum standard of “substantial sexual conduct.” The Chambless definition would permit finding “substantial sexual conduct” in simple misdemeanor lewd conduct, the elements of which include “the touching of genitals.” (CALJIC No. 16.400.)

*1316 I do not believe that invoking this standard from Chambless is necessary in light of the strong evidence of substantial sexual conduct in this case. Clearly, the conduct of the defendant here, however defined, was abhorrent. But, we must mean what we say and must assume that the Legislature does so as well. To apply the standard “any touching . . . , however slight,”…

Opinion

BAMATTRE-MANOUKIAN, J.

Defendant Elijah Samson Lopez appeals after the trial court sustained a petition to commit him under the Sexually Violent Predators Act (SVPA). (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq.)

On appeal, defendant claims the trial court erred by instructing the jury that "masturbation" may be accomplished through clothing, without touching bare skin. Defendant also challenges the SVPA's definition of "mental disorder."

We will affirm the judgment.

In September of 1990, defendant was sentenced to prison for two counts of committing a lewd and lascivious act on a child. (Pen.Code, § 288, subd. (a).) The two victims were brothers Raul and Gerardo S. [1] Raul was 11 or 12 years old at the time of the incidents; Gerardo was nine years old.

The charges stemmed from an incident on June 15, 1990. Defendant had driven to the boys' house and asked to take them to a party. Instead, he took them to his apartment. According to Raul, who was "a little embarrassed," defendant grabbed Raul's penis over his clothing. However, according to Gerardo, defendant had touched the bare skin of Raul's penis. Gerardo stated that defendant then did the same thing to him.

Defendant was…

Lead Opinion

Bamattre-Manoukian, J.

*1308 Opinion

Defendant Elijah Samson Lopez appeals after the trial court sustained a petition to commit him under the Sexually Violent Predators Act (SVPA). (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq.)

On appeal, defendant claims the trial court erred by instructing the jury that “masturbation” may be accomplished through clothing, without touching bare skin. Defendant also challenges the SVPA’s definition of “mental disorder.”

We will affirm the judgment.

L BACKGROUND

In September of 1990, defendant was sentenced to prison for two counts of committing a lewd and lascivious act on a child. (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a).) The two victims were brothers Raul and Gerardo S. 1 Raul was 11 or 12 years old at the time of the incidents; Gerardo was nine years old.

The charges stemmed from an incident on June 15, 1990. Defendant had driven to the boys’ house and asked to take them to a party. Instead, he took them to his apartment. According to Raul, who was “a little embarrassed,” defendant grabbed Raul’s penis over his clothing. However, according to Gerardo, defendant had touched the bare skin of Raul’s penis. Gerardo stated that defendant then did the same thing to him.

Defendant was…

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.