Appellant erroneously convicted of both continuous sexual abuse (PC 288.5) and specific sex offenses against same victim during same date range, in violation of PC 288.5(c)’s requirement such charges be presented in the alternative. Here, proper remedy is remand for trial court to decide which conviction(s) to vacate and then resentence, distinguishing precedents holding remedy is for Court of Appeal itself to resentence to the longest possible term. Further, sufficient evidence of “duress” supported PC 288(b)(1) verdict and no error (PC 1138) in responding to jury question about sexual penetration (288.7(b)) with same anatomical term jury itself used.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/D083424.PDF