People v. Aristakesian CA3

Filed 8/25/14 P. v. Aristakesian CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C075690

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 13F00228)

v.

ARTOUR ARISTAKESIAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Artour Aristakesian pled no contest to exhibiting lewd material to a minor (count one), persuading a minor to model for matter containing sexual conduct (count two), and 28 counts of lewd acts with a child under age 14 (counts three through thirty). Defendant was sentenced to prison for 24 years eight months, consisting of the upper term of eight years on count three, eight consecutive terms of two years each on counts four through eleven, and a consecutive term of eight months on count one. Concurrent terms were imposed on counts two and twelve through thirty.

1

Defendant was awarded 331 days’ custody credits and 50 days’ conduct credits. He was ordered to make restitution to the victims of violent crime program and to pay a $10,000 restitution fine, a $10,000 restitution fine suspended unless parole is revoked, a $300 sex crime fine plus $130 in penalty assessments, a $331.98 booking fee, and a $60.18 classification fee. Defendant’s trial counsel filed a timely notice of appeal indicating the appeal was based on sentencing or other matters occurring after the plea. Two days later, defendant filed a pro. per. notice of appeal and request for certificate of probable cause. Defendant indicated that the appeal was based on sentencing and additional matters. He did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. FACTS On or about and between December 11, 2006, and December 10, 2011, the date range that reflects the victim R. D.’s ages from nine to 13 years, defendant exhibited harmful matter within the meaning of Penal Code1 section 313. This included pornographic images and videos of matter such as naked adults having intercourse. Defendant exhibited the material to R. D. with the intent of arousing, appealing to, and gratifying the lusts, passions, and sexual desires of himself and the minor and for the purpose of seducing her. Defendant also, while possessing facts from which he reasonably should have known that R. D. was a minor under age 14, had her pose or model and took photographs of her, in order to prepare matter containing sexual conduct; specifically, he took photographs, full body photographs, and also photographs focusing on her genitalia without clothing.