Eckard

People v. Eckard

Good Law
124 Cal. Rptr. 3d 811·195 Cal. App. 4th 1241·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 648
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 25, 2011No. B224292California4,214 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Mallano, J.

Defendant Adam Lee Eckard appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial in which he was convicted of indecent exposure and found to have had a prior indecent exposure conviction. Defendant contends his prior Washington state misdemeanor indecent exposure conviction did not render him subject to felony sentencing under Penal Code section 314. (Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.) We conclude that an out-of-state indecent exposure conviction that would have been a misdemeanor indecent exposure if committed in California does not trigger the felony sentencing provision of section 314 because from the Legislature’s choice of the phrase “conviction under subdivision 1 of this section,” in lieu of more genetically descriptive language such as “indecent exposure”; its omission of language addressing prior out-of-jurisdiction convictions with reference to section 314; its limitation of section 668 to felonies; and the absence of any generally applicable misdemeanor equivalent of section 668, we can reasonably infer that the Legislature did not intend for an out-of-jurisdiction misdemeanor indecent exposure conviction to be used to elevate a…

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.