Hiscox

A defendant may be convicted of child molestation based on “generic” testimony from the victim—“testimony describing a series of essentially indistinguishable acts of molestation.” (People v. Jones (1990) 51 Cal.3d 294, 299-300 [ 270 Cal.Rptr. 611 , 792 P.2d 643 ] (Jones).) Because such testimony may fail to establish when the acts underlying the charges occurred, serious problems with the ex post facto application of newly enacted sentencing statutes may arise. This is such a case. We conclude it is the prosecution’s responsibility to prove to the jury that the charged offenses occurred on or after the effective date of the statute providing for the defendant’s punishment. When the evidence at trial does not establish that fact, the defendant is entitled to be sentenced under the formerly applicable statutes even if he raised no objection in the trial court.

A jury convicted Michael Robert Hiscox on 11 counts of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child. (Pen. Code, § 288.) Each count included a finding of “substantial sexual conduct” under section 1203.066, subdivision (a)(8). The jury also found the offenses involved multiple victims under sections 667.61 and 1203.066,…