The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mauro , J.
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
A jury convicted defendant David Arthur Gibson of sexual intercourse with a child 10 years of age or younger (count with a child 10 years of age or younger (count with a child 10 years of age or younger (count , oral copulation , sexual penetration , continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14 years old (count 4), and continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14 years old (count 5). The trial court granted defendant's motion for a new trial on counts 1 through 3, but declined to dismiss count 4. The trial court sentenced defendant on counts 4 and 5, which involved two different victims, to an aggregate term of 31 years to life in prison.
Defendant contends his conviction on count 4 for continuous sexual abuse must be reversed because there is insufficient evidence to support the conviction. We will affirm the judgment.
Defendant moved into a two-bedroom house with Donna B. and her daughter A.C. Defendant and Donna subsequently had a daughter, M.G., born in 1998. In 1999, the family moved to another home on Alfreda Way in Redding.
In 2005 or 2006, Donna and defendant split up. Defendant received legal custody of M.G., who was seven years old. Defendant and M.G. lived in various locations including an apartment on Hartnell Avenue in Redding. In 2010, M.G. informed Donna that defendant had been sexually molesting her.
M.G. was almost 13 years old at the time of trial. She testified that defendant had been molesting or sexually abusing her for "[a]s long as I can remember." The first time M.G. could recall defendant sexually abusing her was on Alfreda Way when she was four or five years old and it snowed in Redding. She was on the bed with defendant and his penis was touching her vagina when their neighbor knocked on the door. Defendant pulled up his pants and ran to the door. The touching made M.G. feel "disgusted." When M.G. was asked how many times defendant touched her in a way that she considered "disgusting," she replied, "[M]ore than I can remember." When asked if it was more than 20 times, M.G. replied, "More than likely."
Defendant sexually abused M.G. for about five to six years and ended in late December 2009 or January 2010. The sexual abuse consisted of defendant touching his penis to her vagina, putting his hands on her vagina, placing her hands on his penis, and putting his mouth on her vagina and licking it.
During cross-examination, when asked how frequently defendant touched her inappropriately while she lived in the apartment on Hartnell Avenue, M.G. replied, "I don't know exactly how frequent. I mean, like I said earlier, I don't pay attention to like the times and stuff." Counsel then asked if the touchings occurred "once a month, once a week, every day," and M.G. answered, "Not every day. But I mean, sometimes once a week. I mean, not once a month. It was definitely more times than once in a month."
M.G. was examined for sexual abuse in January 2010. M.G.'s hymen was abnormal, there were signs it had been penetrated several times, and the ...