P. v. Scott CA1/2
Defendant Paul Scott’s appeal raises several fact-specific questions. Was there substantial evidence at trial that Scott was defending himself, such that it was error for the trial court not to instruct the jury on self-defense? Was there substantial evidence that he and the victim, Jane Doe, cohabitated in an intimate relationship, as required under the theory of Penal Code section 273.5 that was charged in the information? And was there substantial evidence that Scott inflicted great bodily injury on Doe, within the meaning of section 12022.7, subdivision (e)? Our review of the record in response to these questions, and our determination of a legal issue affecting sentencing, lead us to affirm.
Comments on P. v. Scott CA1/2