P. v. Zoudo CA4/3
Defendant Joseph Fred Zoudo challenges his vandalism convictions. He claims the trial court provided an erroneous answer to the jury’s question about the required mental state, omitting any requirement that the defendant intend to damage or destroy the property. Because the instruction properly directed the jury to consider whether Zoudo intentionally committed a wrongful act, we affirm.
Comments on P. v. Zoudo CA4/3