P. v. Gant
Filed 7/24/06 P. v. Gant CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Shasta)
----
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TONY AUSTIN GANT, Defendant and Appellant. | C050484, C050991
(Super. Ct. No. 04F8033)
|
A jury convicted defendant Tony Gant of threatening to commit a crime that would result in death or great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 422; further statutory references are to the Penal Code), and acquitted him of stalking (§ 646.9, subd. (a)), stalking with a 1997 criminal threats conviction (§ 646.9, subd. (c)(1)), and stalking with a 1998 stalking conviction (§ 646.9, subd. (c)(2)). He admitted a strike allegation (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) and two prison term allegations (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). He was sentenced to state prison for eight years. In case No. C050484, defendant appeals from this judgment.
Thereafter, the trial court received defendant's pro per motion for modification of sentence. The trial court clerk subsequently advised him that the court had declined to take action on the motion. In case No. C050991, defendant appeals from that determination. On motion of defendant's appellate counsel, we ordered the two appeals consolidated.
On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred by denying his Marsden motion without conducting a sufficient inquiry.[1] We shall affirm the judgment.
FACTS
The facts of defendant's offense are not at issue and may be briefly stated.
In approximately 1997, Andrea D. dated defendant for approximately two weeks. Following the breakup of their relationship, defendant was very upset and embarked upon a pattern of harassment involving emotional, verbal, and physical abuse including death threats.
Andrea moved to Texas and later to Sacramento.
In 2004, she returned to Redding to be closer to her family.
Sometime in 2004, defendant approached Andrea at a public function and called her a bitch.
In October 2004, defendant telephoned Andrea on her cell phone, although she had not given him the number. He advised her that he would be coming to her home. Thereafter, she heard a knock on her door. When she inquired who it was, her youngest daughter said, â€
