How has the "particularly vulnerable" factor been applied in a sexual assault case?

We address the vulnerability factor first. "'[A] "particularly vulnerable" victim is one who is vulnerable "in a special or unusual degree, to an extent greater than in other cases. Vulnerability means defenseless, unguarded, unprotected, accessible, assailable, one who is susceptible to the defendant's criminal act[.]" [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Esquibel (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 539, 558.) The victim turned

Page 16

17 years old in the month prior to the rape. Thus, the victim was a minor at the time the rape took place. (People v. Yuksel (2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 850, 853.) The victim was sick from drinking alcohol at the time the rape occurred, as evinced by her vomiting multiple times throughout the incident. The victim also passed in and out of consciousness during the attack.

Given that defendant raped a minor, who was ill, and who was unconscious for portions of the attack, the trial court could reasonably conclude that the "particularly vulnerable" aggravating factor applied in this case because the victim was defenseless and susceptible to the attack, even if the victim does not meet the classic definition of a child. (See People v. Yuksel, supra, 207 Cal.App.4th at pp. 853-854 [distinguishing "minor" from "child" and noting that a 17 year old is not a "child"].) Since the trial court's application of the "particularly vulnerable" factor was within reason based upon the victim's status as a minor, the victim's illness, and the victim's lack of consciousness, we conclude the trial court did not err. (People v. Hernandez (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 337, 348 [we review a court's decision, not its reasoning].)