P. v. Wilson
Filed 8/18/06 P. v. Wilson CA1/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ROMEL IVAN WILSON, Defendant and Appellant. | A112196 (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. H-38164) |
Romel Ivan Wilson appeals his conviction and sentence following a jury trial for sex offenses against a minor. Appellant contends the trial court erred by admitting his taped confession and by imposing mandatory lifetime sex offender registration. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for the trial court for a determination on discretionary sex offender registration.
BACKGROUND
The Information filed on March 3, 2005, charged appellant in count 1 with unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, (Pen. Code § 261.5, subd. (c)[1]); in count 2 with sodomy of a minor, (§ 286, subd. (b)(1)); in counts 3 through 5 with oral copulation of a minor, (§ 288a, subd. (b)(1)); and in count six with sexual penetration by a foreign object, (§ 289, subd. (h)). The People gave opening argument on September 26, 2005. The jury returned its verdict on October 3, 2005. The jury found appellant guilty on count 1 and counts 3 through 6, and not guilty on count 2, the sodomy charge. On November 23, 2005, appellant was sentenced to the low term of 16 months on each count of conviction with sentences to be served concurrently. Also, the court ordered defendant to register as a sex offender pursuant to section 290. Abstract of judgment was filed on November 23, 2005, and appellant timely filed a notice of appeal the same day.
The victim was C.W., a younger cousin of appellant's then wife, Isabel S. C.W. first met appellant after he married Isabel. C.W. testified she began a sexual relationship with appellant when she was 16 years old, a relationship she said was based on the fact appellant supplied her with drugs, in particular crystal methamphetamine (meth). In March 2003, she went to his apartment in Burlingame, smoked meth, sniffed cocaine, and then had vaginal and anal sex with appellant. C.W. testified they had no further contact till appellant called her on her cell phone in February 2004. They arranged to meet in the Kaiser Hospital parking lot near the apartment where she lived with her father. C.W. said she met appellant in his truck, smoked meth provided by appellant, and had oral sex in which she copulated him and he put his finger in her vagina and anus. During February 2004, they met in the Kaiser parking lot two or three times a week and each time they smoked meth and had oral sex. On March 2, 2004, C.W. testified appellant picked her up from her apartment and took her back to his house in Castro Valley. Appellant told C.W. her cousin Isabel was at work. Once in the house, they drank beer, smoked meth, and had vaginal and anal sex.
Inspector Luevano testified she was contacted on March 15, 2004, by Jose W. regarding concerns he had about his teenage daughter, C.W., and appellant, his niece's husband. His concerns were based on entries he discovered in C.W.'s diary. Luevano stated she interviewed C.W. on March 22, 2004, and C.W. said her last sexual encounter with appellant was at appellant's Castro Valley house, which she had never visited before then. Luevano asked C.W. to draw a layout of the home. Later, Luevano interviewed Isabel at the Castro Valley home and Isabel confirmed C.W. had never been to the house. Luevano stated C.W.'s layout was extremely accurate. On March 25, 2004, Luevano placed appellant under arrest when he arrived at the Hayward Police Department. Two meth pipes were found on appellant when he was arrested. Luevano stated that after she advised appellant of his rights, appellant agreed to talk to her. She stated she led appellant to believe DNA evidence was available from the carpet in the Castro Valley home, there was video tape from the Kaiser parking lot, and a nosy neighbor had seen him letting C.W. in at the back gate of the Castro Valley home. After that, appellant admitted to having sex with C.W.
Appellant was the only witness for the defense. Appellant testified he married Isabel S. in 2000 and he had seen C.W. at family parties. Appellant said C.W. never came to the San Bruno residence in 2003 and he denied having sex with her there, or at anytime in 2003. Appellant testified C.W. gave him her cell phone number at a family party in January 2003, and told him she could obtain meth through her boyfriend James. Appellant stated he began to buy meth through C.W. at the end of 2003. He stated he met her at Kaiser about four times during February 2004, but only to buy meth, and never had any kind of sexual contact with her. Appellant admitted C.W. came to his house in Castro Valley. He stated he was supposed to be working that day but no one showed up, so he decided to call C.W. to buy meth. He met her at Kaiser, and C.W. asked him if she could hang out at his house for a couple of hours because she was meeting someone later. C.W. stayed for about an hour, sat on the couch and watched a movie on TV. Appellant stated he did not have sex with C.W. that day.
DISCUSSION
A. Confession
Appellant contends the trial court erred by admitting the taped statement containing his confession into evidence because the statement was not voluntary. Appellant contends his statement was coerced by Luevano on promises of leniency, in particular that he would be released if he told her what she wanted to hear.
â€