Mehaisin

People v. Mehaisin

Good Law
101 Cal. App. 4th 958·124 Cal. Rptr. 2d 683·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4592·2002 D.A.R. 10·2002 Daily Journal DAR 10196
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 4, 2002C037300California2,040 words

Opinion

Opinion

Callahan, J.

Defendant Maher Mehaisin was charged with withholding his six-year-old daughter and his four-year-old son from their lawful custodian, their mother. (Pen. Code, § 278.5; further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.) In the published portion of this opinion, we hold defendant’s offer of proof of an affirmative defense of necessity was properly rejected as insufficient. (§ 278.7.) In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we hold that defendant’s offer of proof of a nonstatutory justification or excuse for withholding the children was properly rejected.

A jury convicted defendant of abducting his daughter and son. (§278.5.) He was sentenced to state prison for three years, eight months.

On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred by excluding evidence (1) establishing a necessity defense under section 278.7, and (2) explaining why he kept the children from their mother’s home. We shall affirm the judgment.

Facts

In 1992, defendant and Jihan Mehaisin were married in Amman, Jordan, the home of defendant and his parents. Their daughter, Jewmanna, was bom in Sacramento in 1993. Their son, Mohammad, was bom in Sacramento in 1994. In 1996, the…

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.