P. v. Muro
Filed 6/12/06 P. v. Muro CA2/7
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION SEVEN
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANGEL MURO, Defendant and Appellant. | B177074 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LA043286) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Los Angeles County Superior Court,
John S. Fisher, Judge. Reversed.
Christopher C. Hawthorne, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Jaime L. Fuster and Chung L. Mar, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
___________________________
Angel Muro appeals from the judgment entered after a jury convicted him of making criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422) for which he received a two-year state prison sentence. His sole contention is that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. We agree and reverse.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Prosecution Evidence
Angel Muro (appellant) lived with Elizabeth Jiminez and their daughter M. A gun enthusiast, appellant attended gun shows and collected various types of weapons over the years. On at least one occasion, he carried a gun in the glove compartment of his car. In his home were several loaded firearms and several hundred rounds of ammunition.
Appellant and Jiminez separated in 1999 or 2000; at some point M. lived with her father. When Jiminez sought custody of her daughter in 2002, a bitter custody battle ensued. Jiminez's house and car were vandalized, and she suspected appellant was responsible. Around that time, appellant told Jiminez that he would â€
