Middleton

People v. Middleton

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 18, 2023B312583California9,556 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

A jury convicted Kayla Juanita Middleton of human trafficking of a minor for a commercial sex act (Pen. Code, § 236.1, subd. (c)),1 misdemeanor false imprisonment (§ 237, subd. (a)), and forcible rape in concert of a minor 14 years or older as an aider and abettor (§ 264.1, subd. (a)). On appeal, Middleton contends the evidence is insufficient to support her convictions and the judgment should be reversed on the basis of instructional error. We affirm. Section 236.1, subdivision (c), prohibits the human trafficking of a minor and attempted human trafficking of a minor. Middleton was convicted under the attempt prong. Relying on People v. Moses (2020) 10 Cal.5th 893 (Moses I), she contends the trial court erred by not instructing the jury that the People had to prove specific intent as to age, and by instructing the jury that mistake of fact as to age is not a defense to the attempt charge. We hold there was no instructional error: A defendant violates section 236.1, subdivision (c), when the defendant attempts, but fails, to traffic an actual minor, even if the defendant lacks specific intent regarding the victim’s age. Mistake of fact as to age is not a defense to…

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.