P. v. Davis
A jury convicted defendants and appellants James Davis and Freddie L. Tyson of the following nine offenses, as charged in the amended information:[1] count 1, conspiracy to commit a residential robbery (Pen. Code,[2] 182, subd. (a)(1)); count 2, residential burglary ( 459, 460); count 3, first degree robbery in an inhabited home ( 211, 212.5, subd. (a)); count 5, assault with a firearm ( 245, subd. (a)(2)); count 6, assault with a firearm ( 245, subd. (a)(2)); count 7, assault with a firearm ( 245, subd. (a)(2)); count 8, false imprisonment by force or violence ( 236, 237, subd. (a)); count 9, false imprisonment by force or violence ( 236, 237, subd. (a)); and count 10, making a criminal threat ( 422).
A jury convicted defendants and appellants James Davis and Freddie L. Tyson of the following nine offenses, as charged in the amended information:[1] count 1, conspiracy to commit a residential robbery (Pen. Code,[2] 182, subd. (a)(1)); count 2, residential burglary ( 459, 460); count 3, first degree robbery in an inhabited home ( 211, 212.5, subd. (a)); count 5, assault with a firearm ( 245, subd. (a)(2)); count 6, assault with a firearm ( 245, subd. (a)(2)); count 7, assault with a firearm ( 245, subd. (a)(2)); count 8, false imprisonment by force or violence ( 236, 237, subd. (a)); count 9, false imprisonment by force or violence ( 236, 237, subd. (a)); and count 10, making a criminal threat ( 422).On appeal, Davis contends his conviction for making a criminal threat is not supported by substantial evidence. Tyson also appeals, contending he cannot be guilty of aiding and abetting a criminal threat because he lacked the same specific intent required to convict Davis. We disagree with both contentions and therefore affirm the judgments.
Comments on P. v. Davis