RUILOBA

People v. RUILOBA

Bad Law
131 Cal. App. 4th 674·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1184·2005 Daily Journal DAR 9155·31 Cal. Rptr. 3d 838·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6705
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 28, 2005C046096California5,763 words

Opinion

Opinion

Morrison, J.

A jury convicted Arthur Daniel Ruiloba of three counts of lewd conduct with a child under 16 while he was at least 10 years older than the child. (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (c)(1); further unspecified section references are to this code.) The trial court sent him to prison for four years four months, and defendant timely appealed.

Defendant contends: (1) A statute improperly revived time-barred charges; (2) no substantial evidence supports count III; (3) no substantial corroboration supports extending the statute of limitation; (4) the court should have bifurcated the trial on the statute of limitation; (5) the court misinstructed about uncharged conduct; (6) the court misinstructed on corroboration; (7) the court should have excluded evidence about child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome (CSAAS); (8) the sentence is based on facts not found true by the jury; and (9) certain fines were improper, a claim conceded by the Attorney General.

In the published portions of this opinion, we reject defendant’s claim that he was entitled to a bifurcated trial on the statute of limitations, but we offer an instructional suggestion for future cases, and we reject his claim that…

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.