People v. Carillo CA2/3
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. Prosecution evidence. H.A. lived with her parents. She had a boyfriend named Arturo T. She started seeing Arturo in July 2008 after she broke up with defendant Carrillo, her former boyfriend. Carrillo refused to accept the breakup. He persisted in texting H.A., calling her and showing up at her house at all hours of the day and night to see what she was doing. H.A. changed her telephone number, but nothing discouraged him. Although Carrillo continued to harass her, H.A. did not want to involve the authorities. She pretended to be friendly with him, but she refused to date him. Her way of handling the situation was to keep Carrillo away from Arturo and hope he would eventually give up his obsessive pursuit of her. When Carrillo discovered that Arturo was seeing H.A., Carrillo began harassing Arturo, too. a. The sexual assault. On September 5, 2008, H.A. went on a date with Arturo. That night, he gave her a live baby duck as a present.
1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.