In People v. Castro (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 137, 16-year-old Diana was walking to a bus stop on her way to school. Castro drove slowly by and repeatedly asked if she wanted a ride. When Diana turned around and said no, Castro said, " 'I'll give you $ 10 if you let me lick your thing.' " (Id. at p. 139.) Diana replied, " 'How could you say that? You're a dirty man,' " and kept walking. (Ibid.) Castro then grabbed her arm, turned her around, and pulled her toward him. Diana managed to get loose and run away. On appeal, Castro argued he did not commit felony false imprisonment because there was insufficient evidence he used more force than reasonably necessary to restrain Diana. The Court of Appeal disagreed: "Appellant grabbed the victim and turned her around. If that is all that had happened, we would agree with appellant that his conduct amounted only to misdemeanor false imprisonment. But appellant pulled her toward his car, an act more than what was required to stop her and keep her where she was located. The record is silent whether the victim, when testifying, used body language which may have given the jury additional information than what is contained in the sterile record we have to review. In any event, we conclude the evidence that appellant used force to pull the victim toward his car was sufficient to establish force above that required for misdemeanor false imprisonment." (Id. at p. 143.) The Court determined that sufficient evidence supported the defendant's conviction for felony false imprisonment when, after driving up to a teenage girl and making lewd comments, the defendant grabbed the victim, turned her around, and pulled her towards his car. The Court reasoned that simply grabbing the victim and turning her around did not amount to felony false imprisonment, but the act of pulling her towards the car was "more than what was required to stop her and keep her where she was located." (Id. at p. 143.) "The evidence that appellant used force to pull the victim toward his car was sufficient to establish force above that required for misdemeanor false imprisonment." (Ibid.) The fact that the defendant had not used a weapon or made explicit threats with words or gestures was not found to be dispositive. In Castro, the Court ultimately reversed the conviction for felony false imprisonment, finding that the trial court committed prejudicial error in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of misdemeanor false imprisonment. (Id. at p. 144.)