Court Opinion

ID: 9720314
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 08:25:58.131108+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:15.908406
License: Public Domain

SARKISIAN, J.,* Concurring.
This court has earlier observed: “. . . in view of Castro and Williams, and the fact neither the Legislature nor our Supreme Court has declared these sex crimes in continuum to constitute a single offense, we are constrained by these Supreme Court cases, aged as they may be.” (People v. Luna (1988) 204 Cal.App.3d 726, 746 [250 Cal.Rptr. 878].)
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in People v. Castro (1901) 133 Cal. 11 [65 P. 13], People v. Williams (1901) 133 Cal. 165, and this court’s opinions in People v. Van Hoek (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 811 [246 Cal.Rptr. 352] (review den. Aug. 18, 1988), People v. Luna, supra, 204 Cal.App.3d 726 and People v. Atkins (1988) 203 Cal.App.3d 15 [249 Cal.Rptr. 863], I concur in the judgment of reversal and remand for retrial only on counts X, IX, VIII and V.
A petition for a rehearing was denied January 12, 1989, and respondent’s petition for review by the Supreme Court was denied April 5, 1989. Lucas, C. J., was of the opinion that the petition should be granted.

Assigned by the Chairperson of the Judicial Council.