Opinion
F042761.
7-25-2003
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JEFFREY VERNON KOSKI, Defendant and Appellant.
J. Peter Axelrod, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, and Robert P. Whitlock and William K. Kim, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Appellant Jeffrey Vernon Koski moves the court for summary reversal of his judgment of conviction pursuant to Stogner v. California (2003) 156 L. Ed. 2d 544, ___ U.S.___; 123 S. Ct. 2446 (Stogner). We will grant the motion and reverse the judgment.
Koski sexually molested his 13-year-old nephew in 1984. The nephew reported the molestation in 1998 and Koski, who apparently had been living abroad, was arrested in 2002. Koski was prosecuted under the authority of Penal Code section 803, subdivision (g)(3)(A)(iii), which permitted prosecution even though the offenses were otherwise barred by the limitations period set forth in sections 800 and 801. He pled guilty to one violation each of section 286, subdivision (c)(1) and section 288a, subdivision (c)(1) and was sentenced to a prison term of eight years.
Koski appealed the judgment challenging the constitutionality of section 803, subdivision (g). The Stogner opinion was filed after respondents brief was filed in this court. Appellant cited Stogner in his reply brief and filed a motion for summary reversal, arguing that, under Stogner, the application of section 803, subdivision (g) to the facts of his case violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution. By letter dated July 21, 2003, the Office of the Attorney General implicitly concedes that the judgment should be reversed, waives oral argument, and stipulates to the immediate issuance of the remittitur.
Accordingly, the judgment is reversed. Pursuant to stipulation, this opinion is final for all purposes immediately upon filing, and the clerk of the court shall immediately issue the remittitur. (See Ng v. Superior Court (1992) 4 Cal.4th 29, 34, fn. 1, 840 P.2d 961.) --------------- Notes: Further statutory references are to the Penal Code.