Skip to content
Name: People v. Edmonton
Case #: C036988
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 11/06/2002
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 1/22/03: S112168

The prosecution did not rely on a legally insufficient theory to prove the duress element required for a forcible offense under the Sexually Violent Predator Act. The Third District disagreed with the analysis of People v. Valentine (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 1241 that the legislative revision to the rape statute which deleted “hardship” from the definition of duress also should be applied to the duress requirement of the SVP act. The Third District thought the statute was clear on its face, and that the Legislature could have good reason to retain the “hardship” portion of the definition of duress in other criminal statutes governing sexual crimes.