SAUNOA

People v. SAUNOA

Good Law
139 Cal. App. 4th 870·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 746·2006 Daily Journal DAR 6135·43 Cal. Rptr. 3d 287·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4226
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 19, 2006B185161California595 words

Opinion

Opinion

Boland, J.

INTRODUCTION

Appellant Pesamino Saunoa challenges his forcible oral copulation convictions on several grounds, including the trial court’s lack of jurisdiction to retry him prior to the issuance of the remittitur following his prior appeal. We conclude the trial court was without jurisdiction, and all proceedings conducted prior to the issuance of the remittitur, including appellant’s retrial, were void.

BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Appellant resided at a motel in Wilmington. In February 2003, he forcibly orally copulated two fellow residents. A jury convicted appellant of three counts of forcible oral copulation and acquitted him of one count of forcible sexual penetration with a foreign object. The jury also found true a multiple victims allegation. Appellant admitted all prior conviction allegations. The court sentenced appellant to two third-strike terms of 45 years to life, and one third-strike term of 25 years to life, plus two 5-year Penal Code section 667, subdivision (a)(1) enhancements, for a total term of 125 years to life.

Appellant appealed on the ground the trial court improperly terminated his self-representation. We found appellant’s contention…

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.