What is the test for making a criminal threat?

The crime of criminal threat is set forth in section 422. "In order to prove a violation of section 422, the prosecution must establish all of the following: (1) that the defendant 'willfully threaten[ed] to commit a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury to another person,' (2) that the defendant made the threat 'with the specific intent that the statement . . . is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out,' (3) that the threat--which may be 'made verbally, in writing, or by means of an electronic communication device'--was 'on its face and under the circumstance in which it [was] made, . . . so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat,' (4) that the threat actually caused the person threatened 'to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or her immediate family's safety,' and (5) that the threatened person's fear was 'reasonabl[e]' under the circumstances." (People v. Toledo (2001) 26 Cal.4th 221, 227-228 (Toledo).)

"Section 422 makes illegal a threat which conveys a gravity of purpose and the 'immediate prospect of execution.' " (People v. Melhado (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 1529,

Page 7

1538.) The word "immediate" means a "degree of seriousness and imminence which is understood by the victim to be attached to the future prospect of the threat being carried out, should the conditions not be met." (Id. at pp. 1532, 1538 [defendant's threats that he was going to blow mechanic away with a grenade if he did not return defendant's car after defendant failed to pay for services constitutes sufficient threat under section 422].) The statute, however, "does not require an immediate ability to carry out the threat." (People v. Lopez (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 675, 679.)

A threat, moreover, " 'is not insufficient simply because it does "not communicate a time or precise manner of execution . . . .' " (People v. Gaut (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 1425, 1431-1432 [threats made while the defendant was incarcerated were sufficiently "immediate" for purposes of section 422 given the totality of the circumstances including prior physical violence against victim].) " ' "[S]ection 422 does not require those details to be expressed." ' " (Ibid.) Rather, "[t]he totality of the circumstances must be considered in addition to the words used." (People v. Smith (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 475, 480.)