People v. Johnson

In People v. Wims (1995) 10 Cal.4th 293 [ 41 Cal.Rptr.2d 241 , 895 P.2d 77 ] our Supreme Court examined both the nature of the sentence enhancement for personal use of a deadly or dangerous weapon required by Penal Code section 12022, subdivision (b), and also the standard for reviewing instructional error. In this case we undertake the same examination for personal use of a firearm, the subject of section 12022.5, subdivision (a) (hereinafter section 12022.5(a)).

One of the ways in which a firearm can be used is “to display [it] in a menacing manner.” (§ 1203.06, subd. (b)(3).) We read this language to mean that a defendant has personally used a firearm by a menacing display only if that display was intentional. Although the jury in this case was not so instructed, under the standard of People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818 [ 299 P.2d 243 ], on the facts of this case we conclude that the error was harmless.

Background

All of the charges arose out of a domestic dispute between defendant Michael Dee Johnson and his wife, Teresa, on May 18, 1992. The couple’s infant daughter Meagan and two older children stayed with defendant when, in anticipation of a separation and…