People v. Boyd

California Court of Appeal Jan 31, 1950 No. Crim. 4414Published

Before: Wilson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that evidence of similar sexual offenses against other persons is admissible to show intent and disposition, and that the defendant waived his objection to such evidence by failing to raise it at trial. Furthermore, the court affirmed the conviction, finding the testimony of the prosecutrix sufficient to support the judgment without corroboration.

Issues

Whether evidence of similar sexual acts committed upon a person other than the prosecutrix was admissible.
Whether the defendant waived his objection to the admission of evidence by failing to object at trial.
Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The evidence was admissible in the instant case for the purpose of showing defendant’s lewd and lascivious intent”

“Moreover there was no objection to the reception of the evidence, no motion to strike it, and defendant’s counsel cross-examined the prosecutrix concerning the offense on her sister. The objection first made in this court is too late.”

“Corroboration of the prosecuting witness is not required.”

WILSON, J.

Defendant was convicted of having violated section 288 of the Penal Code, the act charged having been committed upon his daughter 10 years of age. He has appealed from the judgment of conviction.

The prosecutrix testified that her father committed the act while she and her younger sister were sleeping in the same bed, the sister having been asleep at the time; that about a week later he committed the same act upon her sister, they having exchanged sides of the bed as they frequently did without their parents’ knowledge.

Defendant contends admission of the testimony as to the offense upon the younger child was prejudicial error. The

[833]

general rule is that when a person is charged with the felonious commission of a sexual offense evidence of similar acts committed upon persons other than the prosecuting witness is ordinarily inadmissible.

(People

Asavis,

22 Cal.App.2d 492, 494 [71 P.2d 307].) But there are exceptions to this general rule. The evidence was admissible in the instant case for the purpose of showing defendant’s lewd and lascivious intent

(People

Knight,

62 Cal.App. 143, 146 [216 P. 96];

People

Owen,

68 Cal.App.2d 617, 620 [157 P.2d 432]), his disposition to commit the act charged and the probability of his having committed it

(People

Jewett,

84 Cal.App.2d 276, 279 [190 P.2d 330]), and as tending logically and by reasonable inference to prove the commission of the act of which he was accused.

People v. Boyd

AI Brief

WILSON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief