People v. Ball

Filed 8/13/25; Certified for Publication 9/9/25 (order attached)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Appellant, G064274

v. (Super. Ct. No. 20HF0795)

JACOB FREDERICK BALL, OPINION

Defendant and Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gary S. Paer, Judge. Reversed and remanded with direction. Todd Spitzer, District Attorney, and Brendan Sullivan, Deputy District Attorney, for Plaintiff and Appellant. Michael C. Sampson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Respondent.

The Orange County District Attorney appeals from an order setting aside a count alleging that Jacob Frederick Ball brandished a firearm at a motor vehicle occupant. (Pen. Code, § 417.3.) 1 We hold the statute sets forth an objective test about causing fear and does not require a victim to subjectively experience it. Because the count was set aside based on a lack of evidence of subjective fear, we reverse. FACTS On a parkway one night in 2020, Ball pointed a handgun in another driver’s direction before speeding away to a freeway onramp. Ball’s vehicle had been stopped on the passenger side of the driver’s vehicle, at a traffic signal. The driver had taken a picture of Ball’s license plate number after witnessing him drive recklessly. After the driver called 9-1-1, police found Ball at his home, and found a handgun and black gloves in his vehicle. Ball was charged with a felony violation of brandishing a firearm at a person in a motor vehicle (§ 417.3; count 1) and two misdemeanors. At a preliminary hearing, the magistrate (Judge Joy Weisenfeld Markman) heard testimony as to these facts and found there was probable cause to hold Ball to answer all counts charged. The trial judge (Judge Gary S. Paer) later granted defendant’s motion to dismiss count 1. (§ 995.) It reasoned there was no evidence that the brandishing caused the driver any subjective fear. DISCUSSION An information “shall be set aside” if a defendant has been “committed without reasonable or probable cause.” (§ 995, subd. (a)(2)(B).) “‘Evidence that will justify a prosecution need not be sufficient to support a