Kim

Kim v. Superior Court

Good Law
136 Cal. App. 4th 937·39 Cal. Rptr. 3d 338
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 23, 2006B185850California3,030 words

Opinion

Opinion

Zelon, J.

In this petition for writ of mandate or prohibition, we hold that words alone can constitute an act in furtherance of an agreement to engage in an act of prostitution, providing that the statements made are unequivocal and unambiguous in moving the parties toward the agreed act. Finding that to be the case here, we deny the petition.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On May 27, 2005, Los Angeles Police Department undercover officers arrested petitioner Jeongrye Kim for agreeing to engage in an act of prostitution at the Balboa Therapy Center in Van Nuys.

On June 24, 2005, on behalf of real party in interest the People of the State of California, the Los Angeles City Attorney charged Kim with a misdemeanor violation of disorderly conduct, commonly known as prostitution. (Pen. Code, § 647, subd. (b), hereafter section 647(b).) The complaint pled that Kim had “agree[d] to engage in an act of prostitution.”

On June 29, 2005, Kim demurred on the ground that the complaint failed to plead the specific act in furtherance of the agreement to engage in prostitution, denying her due process of law. (§§ 647(b), 952 & 1004, subds. (2), (4), (5).)

On July 21, 2005, the city…

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.