Adams

Claude fought the dog and the dog won. A jury convicted Claude Adams of misdemeanor battery on a police dog (Pen. Code, § 600, subd. (a), (count 3)) along with possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a) (count 1)), and misdemeanor resisting arrest (Pen. Code, § 148 (count 2)).

On appeal, Adams challenges only his conviction for battery on a police dog. Adams contends his conviction on this count must be reversed because (1) the court refused defense counsel’s request to instruct the jury on the definition of the term “maliciously,” (2) the court failed to instruct the jury sua sponte on the definition of the term “without legal justification,” and (3) the court failed to provide the jury with a written instruction on the elements of Penal Code section 600, subdivision (a), as the jury requested. We will affirm.

FACTS

On May 10, 2003, around 11:13 p.m., Bakersfield Police Officer Damon Youngblood was working routine patrol in a marked unit with his K-9. Upon seeing Adams walking with an unidentified Hispanic male in an area known for high narcotics usage, Officer Youngblood decided to contact Adams. Adams appeared nervous; he was…