People v. Jo CA2/5

California Court of Appeal Dec 19, 2024 No. B332220Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the defendant's conviction for kidnapping to commit rape, holding that sufficient evidence supported the asportation element because the movement was not merely incidental to the rape and increased the risk of harm to the victim.

Issues

Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the asportation element of aggravated kidnapping under Penal Code section 209, subdivision (b)(1).

Disposition. Affirmed.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Substantial evidence supports the jury’s asportation findings.”

“Where a defendant drags a victim to another place, and then attempts a rape, the jury may reasonably infer that the movement was neither part of nor necessary to the rape.”

“Jo’s movement of M.J. increased the risk of harm to M.J. over and above what was necessary to the attempted rape.”

Filed 12/19/24 P. v. Jo CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B332220

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. YA105123) v.

UNG RAE JO,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Scott T. Millington, Judge. Affirmed. Spolin & Dukes, Aaron Spolin and Caitlin Dukes for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Jason Tran and Taylor Nguyen, Deputy Attorneys General for Plaintiff and Respondent. ______________________

The jury found Ung Rae Jo guilty of kidnapping to commit rape (Pen. Code,1 § 209, subd. (b)(1); count 1), assault with intent to commit a felony (§ 220, subd. (a)(1); count 2), attempted forcible rape (§§ 261, subd. (a)(2), 664; count 3), sexual penetration by use of force (§ 289, subd. (a)(1)(A); count 4), forcible oral copulation (§ 287, subd. (c)(2)(A); counts 5 & 6), injuring the mother of his child (§ 273.5, subd. (a); counts 7, 11 & 13), first degree residential burglary with person present (§ 459; count 8), criminal threats (§ 422, subd. (a); count 9), forcible rape (§ 261, subd. (a)(2); count 10), dissuading a witness by force or threat (§ 136.1, subd. (a)(1); count 12), stalking (§ 646.9, subd. (b); count 14), and misdemeanor contempt of court (§ 166, subd. (c)(1); count 15). The trial court sentenced Jo to a consecutive term of 34 years plus life in prison. The court additionally imposed a concurrent sentence of 364 days. On appeal, Jo contends the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for kidnapping to commit rape in count 1. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

People v. Jo CA2/5

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B332220

UNG RAE JO,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

FACTS2

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

MOOR, J.

KIM (D.), J.

AI Brief