Park

People v. Park

Good Law
112 Cal. App. 4th 61·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1448·2003 Daily Journal DAR 10738·4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 815·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8573
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 18, 2003B156250California3,462 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

INTRODUCTION

A jury convicted defendant David Ho Park of aggravated mayhem, assault with a deadly weapon by means likely to produce great bodily injury, and attempting by fraud to persuade a witness to give false material information to the police. In regard to the first two offenses, the jury found true the allegations defendant had personally used a deadly and dangerous weapon and had inflicted great bodily injury.

On this appeal, defendant raises only one contention. In regard to his conviction for aggravated mayhem, he urges there is insufficient evidence that he had, as required by law, the specific intent to maim the victim. He therefore asks us, pursuant to Penal Code section 1260, to modify the conviction to one for (simple) mayhem and to remand for a new sentencing hearing. We disagree. We conclude a reasonable trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt defendant had the specific intent to maim and therefore affirm the judgment.

LEGAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Because defendant’s appeal only challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction for aggravated mayhem, we omit recitation of the evidence relating to the other crimes for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.