Fraunheim

(HC) Klippenstein v. Fraunheim

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 19, 20212:21-cv-00086California8,117 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

Background Facts 12 Prior to trial, petitioner had been charged with lesser unlawful sex with a minor offenses, 13 incest, and more serious forcible sex charges. Perhaps as a method of taking away any potential 14 for a compromise verdict, or because the prosecutor was very confident in the “force” case, the 15 unadorned unlawful sex charges were dropped during trial leaving only the forcible sex charges 16 and incest charges. ECF No. 14-4 at 248-249. The only ultimate contested issue was whether 17 petitioner used force to accomplish the conceded sexual activities. The factual summary of the 18 California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District (“Court of Appeal”) is set forth below: 19 The victim, S., is defendant’s biological daughter. She lived with her mother for most of her childhood. When she was 15 years old, she moved in with defendant and his family. After S. turned 17 years old, defendant started commenting on her appearance and constantly asking her if he could see and touch her breasts. S. repeatedly told him “no.” One morning while S. was asleep, defendant came into her room and began touching…

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.