People v. Carapeli

In People v. Carapeli (1988) 201 Cal.App.3d 589, the victim agreed to give the defendant a ride to his home. (Id. at p. 591.) At one point, before the car came to a complete stop, the defendant crawled on top of the victim and, while she tried to set the emergency brake, tried to kiss her, and placed one hand down her blouse and the other hand up her skirt. (Id. at p. 592.) Although the victim resisted, the defendant managed to touch her breasts and vaginal area. (Ibid.) The victim ran from the car and screamed for help. (Ibid.) The defendant ran after her, caught her, threw her over his shoulder and carried her to some bushes, where he threw her down and got on top of her. (Ibid.) The defendant again touched her breasts and vaginal area. The victim asked the defendant to get off her so she could remove a rock pressing against her back. (Ibid.) When he lifted up his body, the victim rolled out from under him and ran to the car. After a scuffle with the defendant, who had run after her, the victim was able to drive away. (Ibid.) In Carapeli, supra, 201 Cal.App.3d at page 591, the jury convicted the defendant of assault with intent to commit rape and sexual battery by restraint (corresponding to counts 3 and 2, respectively, in this case). On appeal, the defendant argued the trial court erred in its response to a jury question asking whether the jury could find the defendant guilty of sexual battery, not guilty of assault with intent to commit rape, and guilty of simple assault as a lesser included offense. (Id. at p. 595.) The court responded that the jury might find the defendant guilty of sexual battery, not guilty of assault with intent to commit rape, and not guilty of the lesser included offense of assault "'because in order to find him guilty of the lesser included offense assault you have to find him not guilty on both counts.'" (Ibid.) The Court of Appeal held that response was correct. (Ibid.) If the jury had returned a guilty verdict on simple assault as a lesser included offense of assault with intent to commit rape, and a guilty verdict on sexual battery, the jury verdicts would violate the rule that multiple convictions are prohibited when one offense is necessarily included in the other. (Id. at pp. 595-596.)