Is there any case law where a defendant has been found guilty of sexual assault on a minor by reason of mutual masturbation?

In Lamb, the defendant masturbated the victim's penis on 10 separate occasions. Although at no time did the victim reciprocally touch the defendant, the court held the conduct constituted mutual masturbation. (People v. Lamb, supra, 76 Cal.App.4th at pp. 670, 682.) Defendant instructed the victim to move her hand up and down his penis which is evidence of mutual masturbation since both defendant and the victim affirmatively participated in the act. Defendant did not simply self-masturbate in the victim's presence while she remained passive. Therefore, his acts do not fall under the nonmutual masturbation exception described in section 803, subdivision (f)(2)(B), and the extended statute of limitations applies.

Section 803, subdivision (f)(2)(C) requires independent evidence corroborating a victim's allegation. Defendant asserts there was no such evidence to corroborate the allegation he directed the victim to orally copulate him while they were in a tent. But independent corroborating evidence does not have to support precisely the incident in the tent. Rather, "[e]vidence of a person's propensity to do what the victim has alleged corroborates the victim's allegation." (People v. Ruiloba (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 674, 683.) In Ruiloba, despite the defendant's denial of having a sexual relationship with a minor, his pretextual conversation with her where he stated he was not "looming over... [a] child" and that there was a lot of "love" between the two of them was sufficient corroborating evidence. (Id. at pp. 685, 687.)