Flores

People v. Flores

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 15, 2024D083310California8,046 words

Opinion

Opinion

Buchanan, J.

Filed 4/15/

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D083310

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. INF1801453)

MANUEL DEJESUS FLORES,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Riverside, Matthew C. Perantoni, Judge. Affirmed in part; reversed in part, and remanded with directions. Mark A. Hart, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Andrew S. Mestman and Arlene A. Sevidal, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. Thirty years ago, our Supreme Court updated the so-called “fresh complaint” doctrine governing evidence of an extrajudicial disclosure made by the victim of a sexual offense. (People v. Brown (1994) 8 Cal.4th 746 (Brown).) Rejecting “outdated notions” that a sexual assault victim is normally expected to disclose the incident promptly (id. at p. 749), the court ruled that the “freshness” of the disclosure and its…

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.