Maciel

People v. Maciel

Good Law
113 Cal. App. 4th 679·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1731·2003 Daily Journal DAR 12673·6 Cal. Rptr. 3d 628·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10107
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 24, 2003No. B163924California2,463 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Grignon, J.

Defendant and appellant Martin Maciel appeals from a judgment after a jury trial in which he was convicted of attempted spousal rape (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 262, subd. (a)(1)), criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422), and other offenses, arising out of an attack on his estranged wife. On the night in question, defendant lay in wait outside the house of his estranged wife. When she returned home, he struck her repeatedly, forced her into the house, shoved her onto the bed, ripped off her clothing, and held a pillow over her mouth. He threatened to rape, then kill her. Eventually, she escaped. Defendant contends his conviction for criminal threats must be reversed as Penal Code section 422 is unconstitutionally vague. In the published portion of this opinion, we conclude Penal Code section 422 is sufficiently certain and definite to withstand a facial vagueness challenge. In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we reject defendant’s remaining contentions. We affirm.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND-FACTS *

*682 DISCUSSION

I. Vagueness

Defendant contends Penal Code section 422 is unconstitutionally vague on its face. 1 Defendant asserts that the statute’s language fails to advise…

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.