legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Ortiz CA1/5
Appellant Joseph A. Ortiz was tried before a jury and convicted of multiple felony and misdemeanor sexual offenses against minors whom he had befriended. He argues that the judgment must be reversed in its entirety because (1) trial court abused its discretion in admitting a “massive” amount of evidence about his foot fetish for the purpose of proving his sexual intent; (2) the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence of other uncharged bad acts; and (3) the prosecutor committed misconduct during the questioning of witnesses and in closing argument. In response to our request for supplemental briefing, appellant acknowledges the case must be remanded for resentencing because the trial court imposed determinate sentences for counts on which allegations under the One Strike law (Pen. Code, § 667.61) had been found true, and for which indeterminate sentences were required. Appellant also argues the conviction as to one count must be reversed due to insufficient evi

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale