P. v. Bertao
Appellant was convicted after jury trial of assault with intent to commit rape and sexual battery by restraint; two prior strikes and two prior prison term allegations were found true. The judgment was reversed because the trial court failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry into appellant's claim of juror misconduct during deliberations. After a second jury trial, appellant was again convicted of assault with intent to commit rape and sexual battery by restraint; appellant admitted the two prior strikes and two prior prison term allegations.
Appellant argues the court committed reversible error by refusing to sanitize two prior convictions that were admitted as impeachment evidence on the issue of credibility. He also challenges his sentence as cruel and/or unusual punishment. Neither argument is persuasive. The appeals court affirmed the decision.
Comments on P. v. Bertao