Sales

People v. Sales

Good Law
10 Cal. Rptr. 3d 527·116 Cal. App. 4th 741·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 279·2004 Daily Journal DAR 2927·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2000
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 4, 2004B156032California3,477 words

Opinion

Opinion

Flier, J.

William Robert Sales is appealing his conviction after a jury found him guilty of attempted extortion (count IV). We find that there was insufficient evidence of attempted extortion and reverse on that basis, without addressing appellant’s other issues.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Count I of the information filed on October 11, 2001, charged appellant with kidnapping (Pen. Code, § 207, subd. (a)). Count II alleged forcible sodomy (§ 286, subd. (c)(2)). Count III alleged forcible oral copulation (§ 288a, subd. (c)(2)). Count IV alleged attempted extortion (§ 524). Count V alleged kidnapping for ransom, reward, or extortion (§ 209, subd. (a)). The information further alleged that appellant had suffered three prior convictions for the purpose of the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), 667, subds. (a)(1), (b)-(i)), consisting of two federal convictions for bank robbery and one state conviction for robbery (§ 211). An additional enhancement under section 667.5, subdivision (b), alleged that appellant had served a prior prison term for the crime of forgery (§ 475a).

Jane Doe No. 1 was the alleged victim on counts I, II, HI and V. Jane Doe No. 2 was the alleged victim of…

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.