P. v. Valdez
Filed 3/27/06 P. v. Valdez CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ALFREDO ANTONIO VALDEZ, Defendant and Appellant. | G035070 (Super. Ct. No. 04NF2087) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, James Patrick Marion, Judge. Reversed and remanded.
Laura G. Schaefer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Brozio and Gil Gonzalez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
I.
Introduction
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees to all criminal defendants the right to confront witnesses and cross-examine them at trial. Based on opinions of the United States Supreme Court and the California Supreme Court, we reverse the conviction of Alfredo Antonio Valdez on one count of committing a lewd act on a child because he was denied his constitutional right to cross-examine the key prosecution witness on possible suggestive interviewing and bias.
The information charged Valdez with two counts of committing a lewd act on a child under the age of 14 years in violation of Penal Code section 288, subdivision (a). Count one alleged Valdez committed a lewd act on a child on or about June 7, 2004. Count two alleged Valdez committed a lewd act on a child â€
