Prantil

Frank G. Prantil appeals from the judgment after a jury convicted him of forgery by uttering or making use of a forged check under Penal Code section 470. Uttering requires a person pass or offer to pass a forged instrument with knowledge of the forgery and with the specific intent to defraud. (People v. Hellman (1961) 189 Cal.App.2d 777, 778-779 [ 11 Cal.Rptr. 433 ].) The jury decided Prantil had the requisite criminal knowledge and intent when on September 4, 1981, he indorsed and deposited a stolen $53,500 check bearing the forged indorsement of Joanna F. McKnight into his trust account. We conclude substantial evidence supports the judgment and reject Prantil’s arguments that pretrial delay and trial court errors denied him a fair trial. We affirm the judgment.

Facts

Prantil’s argument that there is insufficient evidence to support the judgment necessitates our examination of the entire record to determine whether it discloses substantial evidence such that a reasonable trier of fact could find Prantil guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 562 [ 162 Cal.Rptr. 431 , 606 P.2d 738 , 16 A.L.R.4th 1255 ].) We state the facts in detail…