People v. King CA5

DISCUSSION

I. Sufficiency of the Evidence

King argues that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his conviction. We disagree. When reviewing a claim of insufficient evidence, we view the record in the light most favorable to the conviction and presume the existence of every fact in support of the conviction the trier of fact reasonably could infer from the evidence. (People v. Maury (2003) 30 Cal.4th 342, 396.) “Reversal is not warranted unless it appears ‘“that upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial evidence to support [the conviction].”’” (People v. Duran (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 1448, 1457.) In order to find a defendant guilty under section 422, the prosecution must prove (1) the defendant “willfully threatened to commit a crime which if committed would result in death or great bodily injury,” (2) the defendant “made the threat with the specific intent that the statement be taken as a threat,” (3) “the threatening statement, on its face and under the circumstances in which it was made, was so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate and specific as to convey to the person threatened a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of…