When will the Attorney General refuse to contest admissibility of a statement by a defendant who verbally abused a correctional officer and threatened to "kick his ass"?

In arguing that his conduct did not constitute a violation of section 69, defendant points to cases where the Attorney General declined to contest admissibility, where our observations about section 69 appeared in dicta, or that are clearly distinguishable for other reasons. (See People v. Rodrigues (1994) 8 Cal.4th 1060, 1169-1170, 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 235, 885 P.2d 1 [although "defendant verbally abused [correctional officer] and threatened to kick [his] ass, " Attorney General declined to argue on appeal that this constituted a criminal threat]; People v. Tuilaepa (1992) 4 Cal.4th 569, 590, 15 Cal.Rptr.2d 382, 842 P.2d 1142 [noting defendant's reliance on the "general notion

[3 Cal.5th 196]

that abusive and even threatening language does not violate a penal statute"]; People v. Pinholster (1992) 1 Cal.4th 865, 961-962, 4 Cal.Rptr.2d 765, 824 P.2d 571 [defendant's statement to sheriff in county jail that "if he were not sent to state prison he would go out on the streets and do something to get back in " was "arguably inadmissible"], disapproved on

[396 P.3d 456]