People v. Romero CA2/5

I. INTRODUCTION

A jury convicted defendant, Carlos D. Romero, of forcible rape (Pen. Code,1 § 261, subd. (a)(2)) (count 2) and unlawful sexual intercourse with a person under 18 (§ 261.5, subd. (c)) (count 3), both felonies. Defendant received a nine-year sentence. We reverse the section 654, subdivision (a) stay on count three with directions, upon remittitur issuance, to first impose a sentence and then stay it. We modify the judgment with respect to court facilities and operations assessments. We affirm the judgment in all other respects.

II. DISCUSSION

A. Sufficiency Of The Evidence Of Force

Defendant argues there was insufficient evidence of force. We apply the following standard of review: “In considering defendant’s claim of insufficiency of the evidence of force necessary to affirm his conviction of forcible rape, we must determine only whether, on the record as a whole, any rational trier of fact could find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citation.] We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, and presume in support of the judgment the existence of every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence. [Citation.]” (People v.…