P. v. Mick
Defendant and appellant Duane Edward Mick (hereafter defendant) appeals from the judgment of conviction entered after a jury found him guilty of assault with a deadly weapon in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(1)[1]and further found true the special allegation that in the commission of the crime he personally used a deadly weapon within the meaning of section 12022, subdivision (b)(1). Defendant raises two claims of error in this appeal. First he contends that because use of a deadly weapon is an element of the crime of assault with a deadly weapon, the trial court should have dismissed that enhancement. The Attorney General concedes the error. Defendant also contends the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial which defendant based on various claims including ineffective assistance of counsel. Court conclude the Attorney Generals concession is appropriate, and also conclude that the trial court correctly denied defendants motion for new trial. Therefore, Court will modify the judgment accordingly, and affirm.
Comments on P. v. Mick