P. v. Norton CA3
Defendant Matthew Edward Norton was convicted by a jury of sexually assaulting his 15-year-old niece, B.S., when she was staying overnight at the house defendant shared with his girlfriend.
On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion by (1) allowing a witness to testify under Evidence Code section 1108, subdivision (a), that defendant committed an uncharged sex crime, and (2) imposing consecutive sentences for forcible rape (Pen. Code, § 261, subd. (a)(2)) and forcible sexual penetration (Pen. Code, § 289, subd. (a)(1)(A).) We find no abuse of discretion.
Defendant also challenges various fees and fines imposed by the trial court without a finding of his ability to pay them. Defendant contends that imposition of a fee or fine without a finding of ability to pay violates his constitutional rights. We disagree that fines imposed under a statute that does not require consideration of ability to pay are unconstitutional.
Comments on P. v. Norton CA3