California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

People v. Spence, D059463

Defendant's convictions for sexual offenses against a child 10 years old or younger and other related crimes are affirmed where: 1) the rules and policies expressed in James v. Illinois are not implicated by the trial court's decision to permit the prosecutor to rebut the opinions of the defense expert witness; 2) any evidentiary or other error that occurred by trial court's decision to allow an interviewing pediatrician to be questioned about her opinion about the truth of the charges was harmless; 3) there was no prejudicial error in allowing a therapy dog or support canine to be present at the child's feet while she testified; and 4) the terms of section 288.7, supporting his three convictions for molesting a child "10 years or younger," are not ambiguous.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 12/27/2012
  • Published 12/27/2012

Judges

  • Huffman

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel