Chaney

People v. Chaney

Good Law
131 Cal. App. 4th 253·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1124·2005 Daily Journal DAR 8809·31 Cal. Rptr. 3d 714·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6447
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 21, 2005A106034California1,914 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stein, J.

Eric Douglas Chaney (defendant) appeals following his felony conviction of making a criminal threat in a telephone call to Detective Mark Pollio (Pen. Code, § 422), and two misdemeanors involving driving under the influence of alcohol (Veh. Code, § 23152, subds. (a) & (b)). The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation for five years.

Defendant contends that his conviction for violating section 422 must be reversed because (1) the evidence was insufficient to establish that he made a criminal threat; and (2) the court erred by not, sua sponte, instructing on a violation of section 71 as a lesser included offense. He also contends that the court erred by imposing a $20 court security fee pursuant to section 1465.8, because he committed his offenses prior to the date section 1465.8 became effective. We shall affirm the judgment.

Facts* *

Analysis

L

Violation of Section 422

II.

Failure to Instruct on Section 71 as a Lesser Included Offense

Defendant contends that the court erred by failing to instruct, sua sponte, on the offense of threatening a public officer (§ 71) as a lesser included offense of the charged offense of making a…

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.