P. v. Rose
Filed
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID RAYMOND ROSE, Defendant and Appellant. | E039963 (Super.Ct.No. RIF116193) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Stephen D. Cunnison, Judge. Affirmed.
Stephen M. Hinkle, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Peter Quon, Jr., Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Pat Zaharopoulos, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
A jury found defendant guilty of making terrorist threats (Pen. Code, § 422)[1] (count 1) while personally using a firearm (§§ 12022.5, subd. (a), 1192.7, subd. (c)(8)), being a felon in possession of a firearm (§ 12021, subd. (c)) (count 2), and being under the influence of drugs while in possession of a loaded, operable firearm (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (e)) (count 3). As a result, defendant was sentenced to a total term of six years eight months in state prison. Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that there was insufficient evidence to sustain his conviction for making criminal threats. We reject this contention and affirm the judgment.
I
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On