P. v. Rodriguez
Defendants Ismael Rodriguez (Rodriguez) and Jaime Valderama (Valderama) appeal from the judgments entered after a jury trial in which they were convicted of forcible rape (Pen. Code, 261, subd. (a)(2)) and forcible rape while acting in concert (Pen. Code, 264.1). Each defendant was sentenced to an aggregate term of seven years in state prison. Valderama contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the judgment, as the victims testimony was not reasonable and credible and of such solid value that a reasonable trier of fact could properly rely on such evidence in finding the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Rodriquez contends that (1) he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, as the trial court unduly limited his cross-examination of three prosecution witnesses, (2) by improperly restricting his own trial testimony, the trial court denied him his due process right to present a complete defense, and (3) the cumulative effect of the trial courts improper evidentiary rulings denied him due process and a fair trial. Court conclude that the contentions lack merit and affirm the judgments.
Comments on P. v. Rodriguez