What is the effect of the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of nonforcible oral copulation of a minor?

We are not convinced that the failure to instruct on the lesser included offense was, as the People maintain, harmless. Rather, given the state of the record, it appears reasonably probable that the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of nonforcible oral copulation of a minor affected the outcome of the trial on the counts involving forcible oral copulation and forcible oral copulation in concert. (See People v. Breverman, supra,19 Cal.4th at p. 149, 77 Cal.Rptr.2d 870, 960 P.2d 1094, citing People v. Watson, supra,46 Cal.2d at p. 836, 299 P.2d 243.) We therefore reverse Woods convictions on counts 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, and 15.

[241 Cal.App.4th 477]

b. Unlawful intercourse with a minor as a lesser included offense of forcible rape