Error and/or relief
The evidence is insufficient to establish that one of the charged counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child based on sexual penetration took place within the jurisdiction of the superior court, and reverse the conviction on that count.
Holding:
There was insufficient evidence that more than one of the two counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child by sexual penetration occurred in a city in California, as opposed to Mexico.
When considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a conviction, we review the entire record in the light most favorable to the judgment and determine whether there is substantial evidence from which a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
A reviewing court presumes in support of the judgment the existence of every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence.
The victim’s answers to the questions indicated that at least one of the incidents occurred in California, but did not exclude the possibility that the other occurred in Mexico, outside the superior court’s jurisdiction.
Authority:
People v. Maciel (2013) 57 Cal.4th 482, 514–515
People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978, 1053