P. v. Atkinson
A jury convicted defendant of burglary (Pen. Code, § 459),[1] corporal injury to a former cohabitant (§ 273.5, subd. (a)), making criminal threats (§ 422), and interference with a wireless communication device (§ 591.5). Placed on probation, defendant appeals. He contends the trial court prejudicially erred in failing to instruct the jury sua sponte that defendant could not be convicted of burglary if he had an unconditional possessory right to enter the building burglarized and his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to request such an instruction. Since the evidence failed to show defendant had such an unconditional possessory right to enter the building, Court find no error and affirm.
Comments on P. v. Atkinson