People v. Husted CA4/1

INTRODUCTION

Mark David Husted argues that that his convictions for aggravated sexual assault

of a child and forcible lewd and lascivious conduct must be reversed because there is

insufficient evidence of force or duress. Husted also contends that the trial court erred in

failing to instruct the jury sua sponte on the crime of nonforcible lewd acts as lesser

included offenses to the charged offenses of forcible lewd or lascivious conduct.

We conclude that substantial evidence supports the jury's verdicts, and further

conclude that any instructional error was harmless. We therefore affirm the judgment.

II

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Factual background

1. The prosecution's case

J.D. was born in August 1995. Her parents, W.H. and K.H., were married in 1995

and had two daughters together, J.D. and M.H.

In 2000, W.H. and Husted worked for a flooring company. W.H. was Husted's

supervisor, and W.H. invited Husted to live with him, K.H. and their children in their

home because W.H. believed that Husted was "down and out."

2 W.H. and K.H. began to have trouble in their marriage, in part due to Husted and

K.H. growing close. W.H. eventually…