People v. Dominguez CA3

Filed 11/17/23 P. v. Dominguez CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C096163

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 95F09901)

v.

ROMULO DOMINGUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Romulo Dominguez guilty of lewd and lascivious acts on his granddaughter when she was under 14 years old. At his trial, three other relatives testified to defendant’s past sexual abuse of them when they were younger. The trial court sentenced defendant to eight years in prison and imposed a 15 percent limit on presentence credits. On appeal, defendant challenges the admission of the testimony regarding the other sexual offenses, the trial court’s sentencing decision, and the 15 percent limit on credits. We affirm.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Y.D., defendant’s granddaughter and the victim of the charged crimes, testified at defendant’s jury trial that defendant sexually touched her on two separate occasions. The first time was in the summer of 1994 at defendant’s son’s house when Y.D. was about seven years old. Y.D. was swinging on a rope in the house’s basement alone with defendant, who started tickling her and then grabbed or massaged Y.D.’s vaginal area over her clothes. Defendant told her to not tell anyone and threatened she would never see her mother if she did. The second incident happened in late 1994 or early 1995, when Y.D. was seven or eight years old, in the living room of the same house. Y.D. remembered defendant put her on his lap while he had an erect penis, but could not remember any particulars about how he touched her, just that it made her uncomfortable. However, in 1995 shortly after both events, she told police and other family members that defendant had “touched her down there.” Before trial, the trial court found testimony from three other female relatives about defendant’s sexual abuse of them admissible as propensity evidence under Evidence Code section 1108.1 At trial, these three relatives testified that defendant sexually abused them when they were between five and 12 years old, with all of the incidents occurring in Mexico. The jury found defendant guilty of two counts of committing a lewd and lascivious act on a child under 14 years old, the first count’s lewd act occurring between January 1995 and May 1995 (1995 conviction) and the second count’s lewd act occurring during the summer of 1994 (1994 conviction). At sentencing, defense counsel argued for leniency because of defendant’s advanced age and significant health issues. The trial court stated it agreed with defense