Ramirez

People v. Ramirez

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 398·55 Cal. App. 2d 47·55 Cal. App. 4th 47·64 Cal. Rptr. 2d 9·97 Daily Journal DAR 6433
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 20, 1997A073316California4,096 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reardon, J.

Appellant Luciano Ramirez was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape (count 1), attempted rape (count 2), sexual battery (count 3), and failing to register as a sex offender (count 4). Two prior felony convictions alleged as strikes (Pen. Code, § 1170.12, subd. (c)(2)) and as serious priors (§ 667, subd. (a)) were found true. He was sentenced to life terms on counts 1 and 4, plus 10 years for the serious priors. Sentence on counts 2 and 3 was stayed pursuant to section 654.

Appellant challenges, on constitutional grounds, the validity of section 293.5, a statute that allows under certain circumstances the alleged victim of a sex offense to be identified as “Jane Doe” rather than by her true name. We uphold the validity of section 293.5, reject appellant’s remaining contentions, and affirm.

I. Facts

In June 1995, Jane Doe, a 25-year-old married flight attendant, was a resident of Seattle, but based in San Francisco. She shared a “commuter apartment” with other female flight attendants, including Wanda Craig, in Burlingame’s North Park Apartments.

On the afternoon of June 11, 1995, after having completed a flight that originated in Miami, Jane went to the…

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.