P. v. Bailey
A convicted sex offender is required to register in his county of residence. A convicted sex offender who has no place to live is required to register in the county in which he is a transient. If the transient sex offender thereafter acquires a residence, he must register anew within five working days. (Pen. Code,[1] §§ 290, 290.011, subd. (b); People v. Aragon (2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 504, 506.)
Defendant Charles Bailey, who previously was convicted of a crime requiring him to register as a sex offender pursuant to section 290, appeals from the judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of three counts of being a transient convicted sex offender who failed to register after moving to a residence (§ 290.011, subd. (b)) and three counts of failing to register as a sex offender after an address change (§ 290, subd. (b)), and he admitted that he suffered a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) and served two prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced him to state prison for a total of six years.
Defendant’s sole contention on appeal is that the trial court erroneously allowed the People to present testimony as to efforts made to locate two witnesses who did not testify at trial. Defendant claims this evidence was irrelevant and permitted the jury to draw speculative inferences based on innuendo. While we agree that the challenged testimony was irrelevant and thus inadmissible, defendant has failed to demonstrate that he was prejudiced as a result of the court’s evidentiary error. Consequently, we affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Bailey