People v. Lupovitz CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 7, 2014E055849California2,997 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

The facts of the underlying case are not relevant to our resolution of the issue

defendant raises in this appeal. In any event, they are set out at length and in great detail

in the parties’ respective briefs. For our purpose, it is sufficient to note that defendant

was a co-owner of Elite Entertainment (Elite), an escort service with offices in various

locations, including Palm Springs. Women who worked for Elite signed contracts that

said it was illegal for them to engage in sex acts with customers. Secretaries who

answered calls for Elite’s services were directed to tell callers that Elite provided exotic

dancers and nude body rubs. A dancer sent out on a call collected a $200 show fee for an

hour of time. That fee belonged to Elite. The dancer’s compensation consisted of tips

negotiated with the customer.

Suspecting Elite operated as a cover for prostitution, an investigator with the

Riverside County Sheriff’s Department initiated a sting operation in which undercover

police officers posed as clients. The officers conducted between eight and 10 operations

in which they called Elite, asked for a girl to be sent to a hotel room, and when the girl

4 …

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.