People v. Mosley CA2/4

DISCUSSION

After review of the record, appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed an opening brief asking this court to review the record independently pursuant to the holding of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441. We advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to submit any contentions or issues that he wished us to consider. He filed a supplemental brief raising the following contentions. First, he contends that the prosecution failed to prove the criminal intent required for a violation of section 29800, subdivision (a)(1). However, that crime requires no mental state other than that defendant knew of the presence of the firearm, and was in possession of it. Based on the undisputed evidence, defendant knew the shotgun was present in his apartment – he had received it from his father. He also had constructive possession of it at the time of his arrest. The shotgun was found in proximity to the front door of defendant’s apartment, and he was the only resident. Constructive possession is “the right to exercise dominion and control over the [firearm] or the right to exercise dominion and control over the place where it is found. [Citation.]” (People v. Rushing (1989)…