P. v. Franklin
Filed 5/5/06 P. v. Franklin CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EDWIN V. FRANKLIN, Defendant and Appellant. |
F046873
(Super. Ct. No. 04CM2486)
OPINION |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kings County. Lynn C. Atkinson, Judge.
Eric Weaver, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, Stephen G. Herndon and Robert C. Nash, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
On appeal from a judgment of conviction of felony willful and intentional damage to jail property in excess of $400, Edwin Vernal Franklin argues, inter alia, that constitutionally insufficient evidence of the amount of damage requires reversal. (Pen. Code, § 4600, subd. (a).[1]) The Attorney General argues the contrary. We agree with Franklin.
FACTS
Randy Leach, Jr., a detentions deputy, described the county jail, built in 1964, as â€
