Legal Opinion

People v. Julian

California Court of Appeal, 5th District

Decided April 29, 2019No. 2d Crim. No. B289613PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, P.J.

*880Sports fans often use "statistical odds" to predict the outcome of a sporting event. Statistical odds, however, are not a substitute for admissible evidence to decide the guilt or innocence of the defendant.

Cody Adam Julian appeals a judgment following his conviction after a jury trial of four counts of lewd acts upon a child ( Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a) ) and one count of sexual penetration with a child under 10 years old (id. , § 288.7, subd. (b)). We conclude, among other things, that 1) the People's expert witness introduced inadmissible statistical evidence that went beyond the…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  4. Snowden v. SingletaryCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998
  5. People v. CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Travis Bogard v. The State of WyomingWyoming Supreme Court · 2019
  2. State v. Jobert L. MoldeWisconsin Supreme Court · 2025
  3. State v. Jobert L. MoldeWisconsin Supreme Court · 2025
  4. (HC) Mairena v. JonesDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
  5. (HC) Olguin v. KiblerDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API