P. v. Williams
On appeal, defendant contends: (1) there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that he was guilty of assault with a deadly weapon; specifically, he argues that the bottles were not used as deadly weapons because he did not aim at the victim when he threw them; and (2) the court failed to fulfill its sua sponte duty to instruct the jury with CALCRIM No. 123, that a victim is referred to as Jane Doe only to protect her privacy, as required by law. We hold there was substantial evidence to support the conviction of assault with a deadly weapon. We further hold the court did not err in failing to instruct the jury pursuant to CALCRIM No. 123. We therefore affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Williams