P. v. McDonald
Appellant McDonald was charged with five counts of committing oral copulation with a minor, Jane Doe, and one count of violating a court order. He claimed, as a defense to the sexual crimes, that he was mistaken about Jane Does age and believed her to be at least eighteen years old. The first trial resulted in a misdemeanor conviction for violating the courts restraining order, but a hung jury (mistrial) on the other counts. After a firm date was set for retrial of the five counts of oral copulation, the prosecutor learned that a material witness would be out of state during the time of trial. The court granted the prosecutors motion for a conditional examination of the witness, and the video recorded testimony was subsequently admitted into evidence in the second trial. Appellant was then convicted of the five counts of oral copulation. He now appeals, contending that his conviction should be reversed because admission of the video recording violated his constitutional right to confront witnesses. He also contends that the jury was not adequately instructed on which particular acts or incidents it could rely upon to reach its unanimous verdict, and consequently he may have been convicted of uncharged offenses. Although court remand for correction or redetermination by the trial court of certain sentencing issues, in all other respects the judgment affirmed.
Comments on P. v. McDonald