legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Salazar CA4/1
Defendant Daniel Salazar lewdly touched two young victims, when one victim was about five or six years old, and the other victim was about seven or eight. He complains that the victims could not provide adequate details pinpointing the time of the abuse. First, Salazar claims that his right to due process was violated because he was required to defend against charges that occurred sometime within a three-year period for each victim, arguing that that period is too long to reasonably permit him to defend against the allegations. Second, Salazar claims the trial court erred in permitting amendment of the information after the close of the prosecution's case-in-chief to extend the period during which the crimes occurred. Finally, he claims he was entitled to acquittal because the evidence at trial did not show crimes within the period of time alleged in the information.

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