How has section 422 of the Criminal Code been interpreted in a sexual assault case?

Defendant argues that section 422 "was not intended to apply to cases where the only threat is that a crime victim immediately comply with the criminal's demands or face death or great bodily injury." He claims that "[t]he threat was to kill Doe if he did not submit to being sodomized; once he did submit, it was no longer the threat, but the crime itself, that caused any further fear." He concludes that "because it took but an instant for Doe to begin to comply with appellant's demand,... once [the victim] started to submit he had no reason to fear his great-uncle would kill him." In other words, defendant contends that any fear that the victim experienced when defendant threatened him ended as soon as defendant began sodomizing him, which happened so quickly that the victim's fear was not sufficiently sustained. "This argument ignores human nature." (People v. Fierro, supra, 180 Cal.App.4th at p. 1349.) The victim knew that defendant had a "prison background" and that defendant had previously killed someone. At the time defendant threatened to kill the victim if he did not cooperate, defendant was on top of the victim, straddling him with his knees on either side of him. Defendant's forearm was holding the victim's chin up, and defendant was holding a knife to the victim's neck, which hurt the victim. When defendant began to sodomize the victim, the victim was in pain, and the assault lasted for what "felt like a long time." The victim specifically testified that he was "scared the whole time," and he continued to be scared after the attack ended and defendant left the room. Examining the record as a whole, there was overwhelming evidence that the victim experienced sustained fear from defendant's

Page 9