People v. Myers CA4/3

── People v. Myers CA4/3 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: June 08, 2026 Category: General Filed 6/8/26 P. v. Myers CA4/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, G064087 v. (Super. Ct. No. 22WF0512) TERRY LYN MYERS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Lance P. Jensen, Judge. Affirmed. Elizabeth Campbell, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters and Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorneys General, Collette C. Cavalier and Ksenia Gracheva, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *  A jury convicted defendant Terry Lyn Myers of one count of aggravated sexual assault of a child involving penetration by a foreign object 1 (Pen. Code, § 269, subd. (a)(5); count 1), three counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child involving oral copulation (§ 269, subd. (a)(4); counts 2, 3, and 4), two counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child involving sodomy (§ 269, subd. (a)(3); counts 6 and 7), and two counts of engaging in a lewd or lascivious act with a minor (§ 288, subd. (a); counts 5 and 8). As to counts 5 and 8, the jury also found true allegations that the prosecution was timely because the victim was under 18 years old when the offenses were committed and the prosecution began before the victim’s 40th birthday. Defendant later admitted aggravating factors. The court sentenced defendant to 98 years to life in state prison as follows: (1) six consecutive indeterminate terms of 15 years to life on counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7; (2) a consecutive term of six years on count 5; and (3) a consecutive term of two years on count 8. Defendant raises two primary arguments on appeal. First, he contends the court erred by admitting expert testimony on child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome (CSAAS). Second, he argues the court erred by instructing the jury with CALCRIM No. 1193. He claims these errors violated his right to due process and a fair trial. For the reasons post, we disagree with defendant’s contentions and affirm the judgment. 1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated. 2  STATEMENT OF FACTS I. THE VICTIM’S TESTIMONY At trial, the victim testified he lived with defendant, who was his uncle, his aunt, and his cousin for a few years while his mother was incarcerated. The victim was around eight years old when he first moved into defendant’s home. He described himself as a child who was “an absolute terror” and in trouble for “chronic lying.” Among other things, the victim recalled various instances of sexual abuse from 1997 to 2001. For example, defendant made the victim watch pornography while defendant masturbated. The victim believed this happened at least 20 times. Defendant also performed oral sex on the victim about 20 times and had the victim perform oral sex on him. When the victim was around 10 years old, defendant had him i