P. v. Homan CA4/9
A jury convicted defendant David Homan of one count of making a criminal threat and the trial court found defendant had sustained a prior serious felony conviction.
Defendant contends (1) reversal of his criminal threat conviction is required because there was insufficient evidence that the victim, a security guard, experienced sustained fear; (2) the trial court had a sua sponte duty to instruct the jury on attempted criminal threats as a lesser included offense to criminal threats; and (3) if this court concludes defendant waived the instructional error claim, that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by objecting to the lesser included offense instruction. We affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Homan CA4/9