P. v. Prunty
Filed 9/7/06 P. v. Prunty 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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. LARRY PRUNTY, Defendant and Appellant. |
C051285
(Super. Ct. No. 04F06958)
|
A jury convicted defendant Larry Prunty of continuous sexual abuse of a child and 19 counts of forcible lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14 years of age. He was sentenced to an aggregate term of 126 years in state prison.
On appeal, defendant contends (1) the trial court erred in not excluding evidence of statements that defendant claims were obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 [16 L.Ed.2d 694] (hereafter Miranda)), (2) there is insufficient evidence that he committed the offenses by use of force or duress, (3) the court should have granted his Marsden motion (People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (hereafter Marsden)), (4) his due process rights were violated when the jury gave the trial judge a birthday gift, and (5) the imposition of a $20 security fee violated the prohibition against ex post facto laws. We shall affirm the judgment.
FACTS
Defendant sexually abused his stepdaughter between 1993 and 1998, starting when she was in the second grade. The victim, who was 17 at the time of trial, testified that the family was living in an apartment on 4th Street when the molestations began. Defendant would come into her room after everyone else was asleep. He touched her genitals â€