Mendoza

People v. Mendoza

Good Law
118 Cal. App. 4th 571·13 Cal. Rptr. 3d 195·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 711·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4059
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 11, 2004No. B166146California1,479 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Zelon, J.

Defendant and appellant Jose Mendoza appeals his conviction for felony child molestation. (Pen. Code, § 647.6, subd. (b). 1 ) In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we reject Mendoza’s claims that evidence of his prior sexual offenses was improperly admitted in violation of Evidence Code sections 1101 and 352 and that his motion for an acquittal pursuant to section 1118.1 should have been granted on the basis of insufficient evidence that he had an abnormal or unnatural sexual interest in the minor victim because of the victim’s age. In the published portion of the opinion, we hold that the requirement of entry into an “inhabited dwelling house,” as the term is used in section 647.6, subdivision (b), is met here and that the trial court properly denied Mendoza’s acquittal motion because the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction for felony child molestation.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Seventeen-year-old Fernando S. was up past 3:00 a.m. playing computer games in his bedroom when he heard the alarm in his house beeping to indicate an open external door. Fernando investigated the alarm and found a stranger—Mendoza—standing in the house, next to the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.