This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.


Modification: People v. Julian

Ruling by

Arthur Gilbert

Lower Court

San Luis Obispo County Superior Court

Lower Court Judge

Craig Van Rooyen
Statistical probabilities go beyond the scope of the child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome theory; thus, the trial court erred in allowing expert witness to testify regarding statistical evidence.



Court

California Courts of Appeal 2DCA/6

Cite as

2019 DJDAR 4033

Published

May 14, 2019

Filing Date

May 13, 2019

Opinion Type

Modification

Disposition Type

Reversed and Remanded


THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

CODY ADAM JULIAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

 

2d Crim. No. B289613

(Super. Ct. No. 17F-11660)

(San Luis Obispo County)

California Courts of Appeal

Second Appellate District

Division Six

Filed May 13, 2019

 

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION

[NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

 

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on April 29, 2019, be modified as follows:

 

1. On page 12, the citation in the last paragraph, which reads, "(Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 668, 687-692 [80 L.Ed.2d 674, 693-696].)," is modified to read:

(Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 668, 686-692 [80 L.Ed.2d 674, 692-696].)

 

2. On page 15, the following is inserted at the end of the first full paragraph, ending "(Ibid.; Snowden v. Singletary, supra, 135 F.3d at p. 739.)":

Julian did not receive a fair trial. (Strickland v. Washington, supra, 466 U.S. at pp. 686-687 [80 L.Ed.2d 674, 692-693].)

 

3. On page 16, the first sentence of the first full paragraph, which reads, "Julian did not receive a fair trial," is deleted. The following is inserted in its place:

It is beyond question that the errors here were prejudicial by any standard. (Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18; People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818.)

 

There is no change in the judgment.

#273177

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390