P. v. Dillahunty
A jury convicted appellant Gary Videl Dillahunty of assault with a semiautomatic firearm and dissuading a witness by force or threat, and found that he had personally used a firearm in the commission of each offense. (Pen. Code, 245, subd. (b), 136.1, subd. (c)(1), 12022.5, subds. (a) & (d).)[1] The trial court sustained allegations that appellant had served two prior prison terms within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b), and sentenced him to prison for an aggregate term of 15 years.
Appellant contends: (1) the assault conviction must be reversed because it could have been based on two distinct acts and the jury was not given a unanimity instruction; (2) the court should have instructed the jury that merely pointing an unloaded firearm did not constitute an assault; (3) the jury instructions were deficient because they did not define a semiautomatic firearm; (4) the jury should have been instructed on assault with a firearm and brandishing a weapon as lesser included offenses of assault with a semiautomatic firearm; and (5) the court erroneously imposed a full consecutive sentence for dissuading a witness under section 1170.15. Court affirm.
Comments on P. v. Dillahunty