People v. Earles CA4/3

Filed 7/29/15 P. v. Earles 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G049633

v. (Super. Ct. No. 10WF0289)

BUSTER LEE EARLES, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Sheila F. Hanson, Judge. Affirmed. Catherine White, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Arlene A. Sevidal, Andrew Mestman and Amanda E. Casillas, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

A jury found defendant Buster Lee Earles guilty of five counts of lewd acts upon a child under 14 in violation of Penal Code section 288, subdivision (a). Counts one through three charged lewd acts on Jane Doe No. 1 occurring between November 7, 1999 and November 6, 2007. Count four charged a lewd act on Jane Doe No. 2 occurring between March 22, 2004 and March 21, 2005. Count five charged a lewd act on Jane Doe No. 3 occurring between March 1, 2006 and March 31, 2006. The jury found the allegation defendant committed the crime of lewd act upon a child under 14 against more than one victim within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.61, subdivision (c), true. The jury also found the allegation defendant committed the crime of substantial sexual conduct within the meaning of Penal Code section 1203.066, subdivision (a)(8), true. The court sentenced defendant to consecutive 45-year-to-life terms for each of the five counts, and consecutive five-year terms on all five counts pursuant to Penal Code section 667, subdivision (a)(1). The total term imposed was 250 years-to-life in state prison. Defendant contends the trial court violated his right to a unanimous verdict when it read CALCRIM No. 3551 to the jury after the foreperson sent a note to the court indicating the jury was at an impasse with regard to one count. Finding no error, we affirm. I FACTS Jane Doe No. 1 Jane Doe No. 1 was born in 1993. In late 1998 or early 1999 she moved into a unit in a mobilehome park with her mother, P.L. When she was approximately six years old, defendant began dating P.L. Around Thanksgiving of 2000 defendant moved in with P.L. and Jane Doe No.1 and the three resided together until 2010. During this period they lived in a total of three separate residences. In 2006, they moved to a second unit across the mobilehome park. They lived in the second unit for approximately two years before they moved to a townhome in Orange County. They lived in the townhome