P. v. Pea
Defendant Sammy Pea was convicted after jury trial of three counts of incest (Pen. Code, 285),[1] and after court trial of one count of rape ( 261, subd. (a)(2)). The court sentenced defendant to three years in state prison and imposed various fines and fees, including a $20 court security fee ( 1465.8). On appeal, defendant contends that (1) the court committed prejudicial error in refusing to entertain his peremptory challenge, (2) his conviction for rape and for one count of incest are barred by the statute of limitations, (3) the court erred in refusing to allow impeachment of the victim with the contents of a letter written to her by a former boyfriend, (4) the evidence is insufficient to support the incest convictions, and (5) the imposition of the court security fee violates prohibitions against ex post facto and retroactive application of statutes. Court disagree with these contentions and, therefore, affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Pea