People v. Villatoro CA4/3

Filed 9/30/25 P. v. Villatoro CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G063595

v. (Super. Ct. No. 18HF1715)

YURI ABDEL VILLATORO, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Robert A. Knox, Judge. Affirmed. Lizabeth Weis, 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, Eric A. Swenson, Christine Y. Friedman and Monique Myers, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

Defendant Yuri Abdel Villatoro appeals following his conviction on seven counts related to the sexual abuse of two girls. On appeal, Villatoro’s sole argument is that CALCRIM No. 1193, the pattern jury instruction, is legally invalid. He contends the instruction improperly allowed the jury to use evidence of Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS) to determine the victim was telling the truth, and that by extension, he was guilty. He also asserts the instruction permits jurors to conclude the victim’s behavior was “consistent with” abuse, rather than “‘not inconsistent with’” abuse, reflecting a 2022 change to the instruction. Reaching the same conclusion as many courts before us, we find CALCRIM No. 1193 valid and unproblematic. We affirm the judgment. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Because of the limited nature of the issues on appeal, we review the facts only briefly. The two victims, W.E. and K.E., were sisters. They and their family lived with Villatoro as a roommate for approximately four years, starting around 2011. At the time, W.E. was four years old and K.E. was eight months old. Villatoro rented one of the bedrooms in their apartment. After he moved out, he returned to visit. At times, W.E. and K.E. were alone in the apartment with Villatoro while their mother went shopping. On other occasions, the children would go into Villatoro’s room to watch television or movies with him. Villatoro began molesting W.E. when she was five or six years old, and he continued to molest her until she reported the abuse at about 11 years of age. The abuse consisted of repeated acts of oral copulation, digital penetration, and placing his penis outside her vagina. With regard to K.E., he touched her vagina and kissed her on the mouth with his tongue when she was in kindergarten or first grade.