P. v. Fanning
On July 9, 2002, the District Attorney of Riverside County filed a complaint that charged defendant and appellant, Cecil Newton Fanning II (hereafter defendant) with two counts of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under the age of 14 in violation of Penal Code section 288, subdivision (a). Both counts alleged that the act occurred in Riverside County between June 30, 1990, and June 29, 1991, and that the victim of both counts was defendants daughter G.F., who was under the age of 14 at the time the acts occurred. The complaint also included an allegation that the prosecution was initiated in accordance with former section 803, subdivision (g) (hereafter section 803(g)), in that on or about July 10, 2001, G.F. reported to the Riverside County Sheriffs Department that while under the age of 18 years, she was molested by defendant, a criminal complaint was filed within one year of the date of that report, the statute of limitations set out in section 800 had expired, the charges involve substantial sexual conduct, and there is independent evidence that clearly and convincingly corroborates the victims allegation.We agree with defendant, for reasons we now explain, that the prosecution failed to file the charges within the time specified in section 803(g) and therefore the charges were untimely. Because Court reverse the judgment and direct that the charges against defendant be dismissed, defendants remaining claims of error are irrelevant and Court not address them.
Comments on P. v. Fanning