People v. Karl CA2/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 2014B251310California3,643 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

Viewed in accordance with the usual rule of appellate review (People v. Ochoa (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1199, 1206), the evidence established the following. 1. Facts surrounding Karl’s commitment offense. In May 2001, Karl was arrested on suspicion of having committed lewd acts on a child. Karl was 22 years old at the time. Detective Timothy O’Quinn, of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, spoke to Michael, the 11-year-old victim, and to his mother. Michael and his mother were acquainted with Karl from church and from a local food bank where they volunteered, and Karl had done maintenance work around their Palmdale house. One day, Michael’s mother agreed to let Karl stay overnight after working on the house. Karl was to sleep in the living room and he asked if Michael could stay there with him. That night, Karl put his mouth on Michael’s neck and arms, and made “a sucking-type motion,” “mov[ing] his tongue around while his lips were engaged on” Michael’s skin. The following day, in Karl’s presence, Michael told his mother what had happened. Karl, who is apparently almost seven feet tall and weighed about 280 pounds, reacted to Michael’s revelation in a very frightening…

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.