legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Franklin

P. v. Franklin
03:04:2006

P. v. Franklin


Filed 2/23/06 P. v. Franklin CA3




NOT TO BE PUBLISHED



California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.








IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA




THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT




(Sacramento)




----








THE PEOPLE,


Plaintiff and Respondent,


v.


KENYA FRANKLIN,


Defendant and Appellant.



C049123



(Super. Ct. No. 04F05885)





A jury found defendant Kenya Franklin guilty of two counts of unlawful sexual intercourse and acquitted him on two other counts charging the same. All counts involved the same victim. In bifurcated proceedings, the court found true a strike prior and a prior prison term allegation.


Sentenced to state prison, defendant appeals, contending: (1) the trial court erroneously excluded evidence of defendant's exculpatory out-of-court statement; and (2) the trial court failed to adequately inquire into an allegation of juror misconduct, violating defendant's state and federal constitutional rights to a fair and impartial jury. We will affirm.


FACTS


Around April 2004, the 15-year-old victim met the 22-year-old defendant who frequently visited her home and family members. On June 30, 2004, the victim told Sacramento Police Officer Bryan Alonso that she may be pregnant, that defendant was the father since she had sexual intercourse with him exclusively for the past two months, and that they had intercourse at least six times. On July 19, 2004, she told Police Detective Dean Lawrie that she and defendant had sexual intercourse on only one occasion at a motel on Alhambra. She also told him she had a miscarriage and was no longer pregnant.


At trial, the victim said she changed her story to the second officer so that she would not get in trouble with the law. The victim also testified her statements to both officers were all lies which she told because she was mad at defendant for rejecting her sexual advances on two separate occasions. However, she admitted that on June 30, 2004, she was three and one-half weeks pregnant. She said the father was her former 16-year-old boyfriend who she only knew as â€





Description A decision regarding unlawful sexual intercourse.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale