People v. Mackin CA3

Filed 12/24/25 P. v. Mackin CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Siskiyou) ----

THE PEOPLE, C102360

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. SCCR-CRF- 2019-2240) v.

JEFFREY HAROLD MACKIN,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Jeffrey Harold Mackin appeals a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of four counts, including grand theft, for his unlawful killing of a mountain lion that had been part of a study conducted by the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC). His sole contention on appeal is that his conviction for grand theft must be reversed because there was no substantial evidence that UCSC owned the mountain lion. The People concur and we agree with the parties. Accordingly, we will reverse defendant’s conviction for grand theft and otherwise affirm the judgment.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND As part of a program studying mountain lions and deer, UCSC obtained permission from the Department of Fish and Wildlife to temporarily capture mountain lions, which were then outfitted with tracking collars and released back into the wild for study. In December 2018, a researcher with UCSC received a notification that one of the mountain lions involved in the study, known as “4M,” might be dead. Researchers confirmed 4M’s death and contacted authorities given the suspicion that 4M was illegally poached. Game wardens investigated and determined that 4M was treed by dogs and shot in the head. Evidence linked defendant to the killing, including DNA samples from urine left at the kill site that were linked to defendant’s dogs. In September 2021, a previously filed complaint was deemed the information and charged defendant with felony vandalism (Pen. Code § 594, subd. (a); count 1); grand theft (id., § 487, subd. (a); count 2); cruelty to an animal (id., § 597, subd. (a); count 3); and unlawful taking of a mountain lion (Fish & G. Code, § 4800, subd. (b)(1); count 4). In June 2024, a jury found defendant guilty on all counts. In September 2024, the trial court sentenced defendant to two years’ formal probation. Defendant timely appealed, and appellate briefing in this matter concluded November 5, 2025. DISCUSSION The parties agree that defendant’s conviction for grand theft must be reversed for want of substantial evidence showing UCSC owned the mountain lion. For the reasons we shall explain, we agree with the parties. A jury found defendant guilty of grand theft for killing a mountain lion alleged to be the property of UCSC worth more than $950, as charged in count 2 of the information. An essential element for this crime was that UCSC had a proprietary or possessory interest in the mountain lion. (People v. Brady (1991) 234 Cal.App.3d 954, 957.) The well-settled rule in California is that no one holds a “personal property right in wild animals or fish unless captured, tamed or otherwise reduced to possession. (Civ. Code,