People v. Mosley CA4/3
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of Orange County · No. 05NF4105
- Trial judge
- David A. Hoffer
- Outcome
- affirmed — Affirmed.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Raymond J. Ikola (author), Kathleen E. O'Leary, Minor Moore
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
Filed 8/27/15 P. v. Mosley CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. G038379 STEVEN LLOYD MOSLEY, (Super. Ct. No. 05NF4105) Defendant and Appellant. OPINION Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, David A. Hoffer, Judge. Affirmed. Allison H. Ting, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Peter Quon, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Angela M. Borzachillo, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * * A jury convicted defendant Steven Lloyd Mosley of misdemeanor assault, but acquitted him of any sexual offense. The trial court nevertheless exercised its discretion under former Penal Code section 290, subdivision (a)(2)(E) (now Penal Code § 290.006) and ordered defendant to register as a sex offender based upon its own factual findings about his motivations – facts not proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury. In a prior opinion, we held that the residency restrictions imposed upon registered sex offenders by Jessica’s law (Prop. 83, as approved by voters Gen. Elec. (Nov. 7, 2007)) (§ 3003.5, subd. (b)) increased defendant’s penalty beyond the prescribed statutory maximum, thereby requiring the fact of defendant’s sexual motivation to be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt under Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, 490. We modified the judgment by striking the discretionary sex offender registration requirement and affirmed the judgment as modified. The California Supreme Court reversed our judgment “insofar as it modified defendant’s conviction by striking the sex offender registration requirement,” and otherwise affirmed. (People v. Mosley (2015) 60 Cal.4th 1044, 1070.) Accordingly, we now affirm the trial court’s judgment in full.
IKOLA, J.
WE CONCUR:
O’LEARY, P. J.
MOORE, J.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Mosley S187965 · 2015-03-02