People v. Dorado CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 31, 2022D078342MCalifornia20,071 words

Opinion

Opinion

Do, J.

INTRODUCTION

Over the span of nearly a decade, Daniel Dorado, a local business owner, lured four women to meet him in ostensible job interviews or dates arranged through online dating websites. On each occasion, he provided alcohol to the woman until she was intoxicated or unconscious, and then sexually assaulted her while she was incapacitated. A jury convicted Dorado of committing 20 counts of sex crimes against the four victims, including rape, sexual penetration, and oral copulation of an unconscious or intoxicated

person, as well as assault with intent to commit specified sex offenses.1 The trial court sentenced Dorado to a prison term of 40 years. Dorado does not challenge whether there is sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict. He asserts his convictions must be reversed on three grounds. First, he claims he did not receive his constitutionally required notice of the factual basis of two charges on which he was convicted. Second, he claims his convictions on four counts of assault with intent to commit rape, oral copulation, or sexual penetration of an unconscious or intoxicated person must be reversed because each is a lesser included offense of the completed…

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.