How have courts treated duress and psychological coercion in the context of sexual assault cases?

Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, defendant's appellate counsel has suggested we review the entire record to determine whether defendant's conviction of committing a lewd act on a child under the age of 14 by force, duress, menace, or threat ( 288, subd. (b)(1)) is supported by substantial evidence. We have done so.

Duress in the context of sexual crimes "involves psychological coercion." (People v. Senior (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 765, 775.) It "can arise from various circumstances, including the relationship between the defendant and the victim and their relative ages and sizes." (Ibid.) "'Where the defendant is a family member and the victim is young, . . . the position of dominance and authority of the defendant and his continuous exploitation of the victim' is relevant to the existence of duress." (Ibid.) "'Other relevant factors include threats to harm the victim, physically controlling the victim when the victim attempts to resist, and warnings to the victim that revealing the

Page 7

molestation would result in jeopardizing the family.'" (People v. Veale (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 40, 46.)