The California Court of Appeal has upheld the conviction of Robert Hrbac for continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14 years old and for dissuading a witness by conspiracy. The court's decision, filed on November 5, 2026, is significant as it addresses the admissibility of prior sexual offense evidence and the defense of unconsciousness in child sexual abuse cases.

Hrbac was convicted after a jury trial in 2024, where he faced serious allegations involving his daughter, Z.H., who was just six years old at the time of the abuse. The case has drawn attention due to its sensitive nature and the legal implications surrounding the admissibility of evidence related to prior offenses.

Background

Robert Hrbac, a registered sex offender, was charged with sexually abusing his daughter, Z.H., and for attempting to dissuade a witness. The allegations emerged in April 2023 when Z.H. made a concerning comment to a family member about inappropriate touching. This prompted an investigation, leading to multiple forensic interviews where Z.H. disclosed instances of sexual abuse that began when she was three or four years old.

Hrbac's prior criminal history includes a conviction for lewd acts against a child under 14 years old in 2006. During the trial, the prosecution sought to introduce evidence of other uncharged sexual offenses against multiple minors to establish a pattern of behavior. Hrbac contested the admissibility of this evidence, arguing it was prejudicial and not relevant to the current charges.

The Ruling

The California Court of Appeal ruled that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of Hrbac's prior sexual offenses under Evidence Code section 1108. The court stated, "The evidence was probative of Hrbac’s guilt on count one, noting the similar ages of the victims and that some of the same conduct occurred in each case." The court emphasized that the similarities between the charged and uncharged offenses were significant enough to justify their inclusion.

Furthermore, the court found that any potential error regarding the failure to instruct the jury on the defense of unconsciousness was harmless. The jury had been instructed that to convict Hrbac, they must find that he acted willfully, which contradicts the notion of unconsciousness. The opinion noted, "the jury found Hrbac guilty of continuous sexual abuse of Z.H., it necessarily found that he purposefully committed the acts of sexual abuse."

Impact

This ruling reinforces the legal precedent regarding the admissibility of prior bad acts in sexual abuse cases, particularly when the defendant's history is relevant to the current charges. It highlights the court's willingness to allow such evidence when it shows a pattern of behavior, which can be crucial in cases involving child victims.

The decision also underscores the importance of jury instructions in ensuring that defendants receive a fair trial. By clarifying the definitions of terms like "willfully," the court aims to prevent misunderstandings that could affect the outcome of a trial.

What's Next

As of now, it is unclear if Hrbac will seek further appeals following this ruling. The court's decision in this case may influence future cases involving similar charges and the admissibility of prior offenses, as it sets a clear standard for how such evidence can be evaluated in court.