People v. Cornett
53 Cal. 4th 1261
| Cal. | 2012Background
- Cornett sexually molested his two stepdaughters and was convicted of seven felony sex offenses, including 288.7(b).
- Jane Doe 1 was 10 years and about 11 months old at the time of the offense.
- The trial court sentenced 50 years to life on 288.7(b), with 654 stayed.
- Court of Appeal majority held that “10 years of age or younger” excludes victims who have passed their 10th birthday.
- People petitioned for review; the Supreme Court granted review.
- Court resolves whether the phrase means under 11 years of age, aligning with ordinary age understanding and legislative purpose.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the phrase '10 years of age or younger' includes 10-year-olds who have not yet reached age 11. | People contends it includes under 11. | Cornett contends it is limited to under 11 only for the day of the 11th birthday. | Yes; includes under 11 (ordinary meaning). |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Murphy, 25 Cal.4th 136 (Cal. 2001) (statutory interpretation principles)
- Wasatch Property Management v. Degrate, 35 Cal.4th 1111 (Cal. 2005) (ordinary meaning of age terms; dictionary logic)
- People v. King, 38 Cal.4th 617 (Cal. 2006) (plain meaning governs if no ambiguity)
- In re Harris, 5 Cal.4th 813 (Cal. 1993) (birthday rule distinction acknowledged; not controlling here)
- Burris v. Superior Court, 34 Cal.4th 1012 (Cal. 2005) (rule of lenity not automatic when legislative intent discernible)
- Lexin v. Superior Court, 47 Cal.4th 1050 (Cal. 2010) (lenity considerations in interpretation)
- People v. Soria, 48 Cal.4th 58 (Cal. 2010) (lenity and reasonable interpretations)
- People v. Avery, 27 Cal.4th 49 (Cal. 2002) (statutory construction and notice considerations)