legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Gust CA2/8
Erick Gust attacks the sufficiency of the evidence for his commitment under the Sexually Violent Predator Act (the Act). (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq.) Gust’s admission of watching child pornography, his convictions for lewd conduct with children, and his long-lasting compulsion to make reams of drawings of children having sex provide ample evidence for the judgment. We affirm.
I
In 2009, Gust pleaded no contest to two counts of lewd or lascivious acts with children. (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a).) We call these his qualifying offenses.
The victims, a nine-year-old boy and an eight-year-old girl, came to Gust’s home to play with his children. Gust was 41 years old.
In May 2008, Gust showed the boy magazines with naked women. Gust touched the boy’s hips or buttocks over his clothes approximately 10 times. He texted the boy photos, including a photo of a naked child urinating. Gust asked the boy if he would ever take a photo like that.

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