Does Defendant have sufficient evidence to support his conviction of kidnapping under section 207 of the California Criminal Code?

Defendant contends that the evidence presented at the guilt phase of trial was insufficient to support his conviction of kidnapping under section 207 and therefore his conviction of felony murder predicated on kidnapping because there was assertedly no evidence that Danielle was removed from her house by force or fear. Defendant emphasizes that there is no evidence showing how Danielle was taken, no evidence of a disturbance or commotion noticed by those at the house or the family dog, and no trace evidence linking defendant to the interior of the Van Dam home. He contends, therefore, that the circumstances amount to a taking effected by fraud or deceit, which does not constitute kidnapping within the meaning of section 207. (See People v. Majors (2004) 33 Cal.4th 321, 327-328, 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 870, 92 P.3d 360.) Defendant further asserts that the record contains no evidence of later use of force or exploitation of fear. We reject defendants sufficiency of the evidence claim.

Defendant was charged with kidnapping Danielle in violation of section 207, subdivision

[433 P.3d 973]

(a), which provides that "[e]very person who forcibly, or by any

[6 Cal.5th 713]