# People v. Martinez

> California Supreme Court · November 2, 1995 · 11 Cal. 4th 434

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9790765

## Case

- **Full name:** The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PABLO CRUZ MARTINEZ, Defendant and Appellant
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** November 2, 1995
- **Citations:** 11 Cal. 4th 434; 45 Cal. Rptr. 2d 905; 903 P.2d 1037; 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8537; 1995 Cal. LEXIS 6287
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Mosk
- **Judges:** Baxter, Mosk
- **Cited by:** 260 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9790765

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that “throughout [section 288’s] history, the cases have made clear that a 'touching' of the victim is required, and that sexual gratification must be presently intended at the time such ‘touching’ occurs,” though the ultimate form of the touching is immaterial
- explaining that “sexual gratification must be presently intended at the time such ‘touching’ occurs” but that a “lewd or lascivious act can occur through the victim’s clothing and can involve ‘any part’ of the victim’s body”
- noting that jury deliberations were longer than the evidentiary phase of the trial
- holding that a lewd or lascivious action under § 288(a) can occur through a victim’s clothing

## Opinion text

MOSK, J.
I concur in the judgment on the facts of this case. I do so because I read Penal Code section 288, subdivision (a), to impliedly define a “lewd or lascivious act” as any conduct committed “with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying” the “lust,” “passions,” or “sexual desires” of either the perpetrator or the underage victim.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9790765. Public record. Not legal advice.