People v. Hartman CA4/2

DISCUSSION

A. Statute of Limitations

Hartman argues that prosecution for the forcible rape count was time-barred

because he was charged 12 years after the offense and the statute of limitations for a

forcible rape charge is six years. He argues that for purposes of determining the

applicable limitations period, the plain language of sections 799 and 805 precludes

consideration of the maximum punishment prescribed for the One Strike law allegation.

The People counter that we should follow People v. Perez (2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 231

(Perez), which held that for purposes of determining the statute of limitations, the

maximum sentence for the offense is the sentence provided by the One Strike law. In

Perez, the court held that the life sentence under the One Strike law resulting from a

2 multiple victim finding was the proper basis for determining the applicable limitations

period. (Perez, supra, at pp. 239-240.) As a result, prosecution for the offense could

“‘be commenced at any time.’” (Id at pp. 237, 239) We agree with the reasoning and

analysis of Perez, which applies with equal force to the One Strike law allegation found

true as to Hartman.

For purposes of…