What is the test for determining whether a broomstick is a deadly instrument?

(Italics added.) Some objects, like dirks and blackjacks, are deemed deadly weapons as a matter of law. The jury may find other objects to be "deadly instruments" when the object is used in a manner and under circumstances indicating a likelihood of producing death or great bodily injury. "In determining whether an object not inherently deadly or dangerous is used as such, the trier of fact may consider the nature of the object, the manner in which it is used, and all other facts relevant to the issue." (People v. Aguilar (1997) 16 Cal.4th 1023, 1028-1029 [bare hands or feet cannot be deadly weapons within meaning of assault statute]; People v. Russell (1943) 59 Cal.App.2d 660, 665 [relevant factors in determining whether object qualifies as a deadly weapon include nature of the object, the manner of its use, the location of the injuries inflicted, and the extent of injuries].)

People v. Beasley (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 1078, guides our analysis. There, the defendant was charged under section 245, subdivision (a), with using a broomstick and vacuum cleaner attachment to strike the victim. The victim testified the defendant struck her with the objects, bruising her arms and shoulders. (Id. at pp. 1085-1086.) The appellate court found that while a "sufficiently strong and/or heavy broomstick might be wielded in a manner capable of producing, and likely to produce, great bodily injury, e.g., forcefully striking a small child or a frail adult or any person's face or head," the victim's testimony "was far too cursory to establish that the broomstick . . . was capable of causing, and likely to cause, great bodily injury or death. [The defendant] did not strike her head or face with the stick, but instead used it only on her arms and shoulders. [The victim] did not describe the degree of force [the defendant] used in hitting her with the stick, and neither the stick itself nor photographs of it were introduced in evidence. The record does not indicate whether the broomstick was solid wood or a hollow tube made of metal, fiberglass, or plastic. Its composition, weight, and rigidity would necessarily affect the probability and likelihood that it could cause great bodily injury." (Id. at pp. 1087-1088.) The court also noted "[s]triking an adult's

Page 7