Medelez
People v. Medelez
Opinion
Opinion
Tangeman, J.
*661 Angel Medelez contacted a minor with intent to engage in oral sex (Pen. Code, § 288.3, "luring"), and then took a direct but ineffectual act toward his goal (§§ 664, 288a, subd. (b)(1), "attempt"). Here we decide he may be convicted of both crimes because luring is not a special statute intended to preclude prosecution for attempt, *404 and neither crime is the lesser included offense of the other.
Medelez appeals judgment after conviction by jury of three sex offenses against his adult roommate and two sex offenses against a minor. (§§ 288a, subds. (f) & (i), 243.4, subd. (e)(1), 288.3, subd. (a), 664, 288a, subd. (b)(1).) The trial court sentenced Medelez to six years eight months in prison, including two consecutive sentences of four months each for attempt to orally copulate a minor (§§ 664, 288a, subd. (b)(1)) and luring the minor with intent to orally copulate (§ 288.3, subd. (a) ).
We stay the four-month sentence for attempted oral copulation (§ 654), correct the abstract of judgment to delete a dismissed count, and otherwise affirm.
In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we consider and reject Medelez's contention that all his convictions must be reversed…