Can a jury reasonably conclude that defendant acted with the requisite intent to make a threat against a woman?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. McClain, C084335 (Cal. App. 2018):

Second, a jury could reasonably conclude, despite any evidence of mental illness or intoxication, that defendant acted with the requisite intent. (See People v. Horton (1995) 11 Cal.4th 1068, 1119 ["evidence of voluntary intoxication is relevant to the extent it bears upon the question whether the defendant actually had the requisite specific mental state required for commission of the crimes at issue"].) On at least three separate occasions, defendant specifically targeted the victim. During the charged incident, defendant did not approach the victim until after her husband had left. And when defendant saw the husband returning, he immediately walked away. From this evidence, a jury could reasonably infer consciousness of guilt and the ability to form specific intent to have his words taken as a threat.

Page 7

Substantial evidence supports the criminal threats conviction.

The judgment is affirmed.

Other Questions


What evidence is sufficient to determine whether defendant acted with the requisite intent to sexually gratify himself by penetrating the rectum of a young woman in her bed? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a jury to determine whether a defendant committed an intentional act or an intentional failure to do a required act? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for establishing intent in a criminal case when a defendant has committed an uncharged act of violence against another defendant? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant acted with the indicated motivation and intent to commit acts of hatred or ill will? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant who made a threat to set fire to a building after making the threat, setting fire to the victim's workplace after the threat was made? (California, United States of America)
What is the significance of the time at which defendant must have formed the requisite intent to be liable as an aider and abettor? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant possessed the requisite intent to kill? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant's reasonableness of their conduct is reasonable? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a jury to conclude that a defendant killed his victim in unreasonable but good faith belief in having to act in self-defense? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant can reasonably have reasonably anticipated the events leading up to the action? (California, United States of America)
X



Whitelogo nobg 300dpi sm


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."


Trusted by top litigators from across North America.