Does the statute of limitations apply to an allegation of sexual assault?

There is, however, as appellant points out, a long line of California authority that has held that compliance with the statute of limitations must be demonstrated by the prosecution. (In re Demillo (1975) 14 Cal.3d 598, 601, 121 Cal.Rptr. 725, 535 P.2d 1181; People v. McGee (1934) 1 Cal.2d 611, 613, 36 P.2d 378.)

" '[T]he statute of limitations ... is jurisdictional, and ... an indictment or information which shows on its face that the prosecution is barred by limitations, fails to state a public offense.' [Citations.] 'An accusatory pleading must allege facts showing that the prosecution is not barred by the statute of limitations [citations], ...' [Citation.] [p] There is no case law in California on the question of whether, the statute of limitations having run to an offense, a later statutory amendment extending the filing time would apply to that offense...." (Sobiek v. Superior Court (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d at p. 849, 106 Cal.Rptr. 516.)