P. v. Stott
Filed 7/19/06 P. v. Stott CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 FOUR
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RANDY MITCHELL STOTT, Defendant and Appellant. | B185151 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LA047867) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, John S. Fisher, Judge. Affirmed.
Matthew Alger, 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, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Ana R. Duarte and Catherine Okawa Kohm, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Randy Mitchell Stott appeals from judgment entered following a court trial in which he was convicted of carrying a dirk or dagger (Pen. Code, § 12020, subd. (a)(4)). Sentenced to prison for three years, he contends the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction in that there is no substantial evidence that the weapon was concealed. For reasons explained in the opinion, we affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
On December 28, 2004, appellant entered a branch of a Washington Mutual Bank in North Hollywood and â€
