Is defendant's possession of a loaded firearm sufficient to permit a jury to view his possession as an implied threat of violence?

of defendant's possession of a loaded firearm, at a time when he was subject to parole searches in Arizona, is sufficient to permit a jury to view his possession as an implied threat of violence. (See People v. Michaels, supra, 28 Cal.4th at p. 536, 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 285, 49 P.3d 1032.) We reject defendant's contention that some additional extraordinary circumstance was required. Defense counsel was free to argue to the jury (and indeed did argue) that defendant possessed the gun for the purpose of self-protection, not for criminal violence. (See ibid.)

[240 P.3d 236]

The trial court did not err in admitting the evidence.