Bradley

People v. Bradley

Bad Law
15 Cal. App. 4th 1144·19 Cal. Rptr. 2d 276·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 504·93 Daily Journal DAR 5968·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3515
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 21, 1993D016498California4,512 words

Opinion

Opinion

Work, J.

Raymond James Bradley appeals a judgment convicting him of kidnapping with the intent to commit rape (Pen. Code, §§ 207, 208, subd. (d)), assault with the intent to commit rape (§ 220), and sexual battery (§ 243.4, subd. (a)). Bradley contends his slight movement of the victim cannot support a conviction of kidnapping as a matter of law; there was insufficient evidence to establish his intent to rape to support his kidnapping and assault convictions; he was improperly denied probation; and, section 654 mandates execution be stayed on his convictions for assault with the intent to commit rape and sexual battery. As we shall explain, we conclude Bradley’s contentions to be without merit except that the trial court should have stayed execution on his conviction for sexual battery. Accordingly, the judgment is modified to stay execution on his sexual battery conviction and, as modified, the judgment is affirmed.

Factual and Procedural Background

On Friday evening, November 8, 1991, 16-year-old Margaret H. was at work at Swensen’s Ice Cream & Eating Establishment in La Mesa. Sometime after 6 p.m., Margaret left the store and used the pay phone directly out front of Swensen’s…

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.