People v. Moulder CA3
Filed 10/6/23 P. v. Moulder CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Lassen) ----
THE PEOPLE, C096402
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CR038228)
v.
MARK ANTHONY MOULDER,
Defendant and Appellant.
A jury found defendant Mark Anthony Moulder guilty of three counts of continuous sexual abuse of a child (Pen. Code, § 288.5, subd. (a))1 and found true the special allegation that defendant committed a sex offense against more than one victim (§ 667.61, subds. (e)(4), (j)(2)). The trial court imposed a sentence of three consecutive terms of 25 years to life in state prison. On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in ordering defendant to undergo HIV testing under section 1202.1, subdivisions (a) and (e)(5)(A)(iv), because
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
1
there was insufficient evidence to support probable cause to believe that defendant’s bodily fluids capable of transmitting the HIV virus came into contact with the children. The People agree, asserting that the appropriate remedy is remand to the trial court to give the prosecution an opportunity to present additional evidence. We will remand the case for that purpose. In addition, we will order the court to add one day to defendant’s presentence credits. We otherwise affirm the judgment. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Rikki D., the mother of V.S., became friends with defendant after they met at church. Rikki D. and her daughter V.S. moved in with defendant. Defendant acted in the role of father to Rikki D. and his relationship with V.S. was like a father or grandfather. Rikki D. moved out of defendant’s house when she started dating someone and defendant began acting possessively. After that, Rikki D. lived off and on with a friend. Rikki D. then entered into a relationship with Dustin R., who himself had a daughter, H.R. In 2020, when V.S. was eight, she would visit defendant at his home once or twice a week to play. Defendant regularly babysat two other girls, J.B. and M.B, and sometimes H.R. When V.S. was at defendant’s house, there were incidents where he touched her vagina. The touching started as tickling. When defendant tickled V.S., he would move his hands up and down her body toward her private parts. Defendant also touched her “back end” and her chest. Defendant touched V.S. over her clothes. These incidents happened almost every time V.S. went to defendant’s house. Defendant sometimes ignored V.S.’s pleas to stop. These incidents made V.S. feel sad and mad. V.S. was afraid to tell anyone because defendant had guns. Defendant took pictures and videos of V.S. One picture showed V.S. cooking in her bra. Other pictures showed her in the bath, doing a handstand in her underwear, and asleep in her mother’s bed.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)