Legal Question in Criminal Law in California

1. My initial response is no, since he said only that he felt like doing it and not that he actually would. But context matters. Words that wouldn't amount to a criminal threat by themselves could qualify, depending upon his tone of voice and other circumstances. It's also possible that there is more to the story than you have told us.

The key statutory language is in Penal Code section 422(a), which says:

"Any person who willfully threatens to commit a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury to another person, with the specific intent that the statement, made verbally, in writing, or by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out, which, on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made, is 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, and thereby causes that person reasonably to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or her immediate family's safety, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison."

It does not matter that your friend was speaking to a third party. It's easy to threaten one person in a statement that is directed to someone else but that she can hear. The law recognizes this reality.

So if your friend made this statement with the intent to make his roommate think he was about to carry it out, and if she reasonably feared for her safety as a result for more than a moment or two, then he is guilty even though the words would not be enough by themselves to qualify as a criminal threat.

Note that the law does not require threats over a "sustained amount of time" as you claim. Instead it requires that the victim be in "sustained fear". A brief statement can cause fear that lasts quite a while.

2. Only if you are a licensed attorney, which I presume you are not. Given your misunderstandings about the law, it's a good thing that you can't represent your friend.

Are you sure Monday's proceeding will be a trial? It might just be a prelim or some other pretrial hearing.

If your friend really is going to trial on Monday, he should already have a lawyer. If he doesn't, he may still be able to get one if he asks tomorrow or at the start of Monday's proceeding. But if he has previously declined to get a lawyer and opted to represent himself, the court might not let him change his mind at the last minute.

His TRIAL is Monday?

It is too late for him [and certainly you] to be worrying about what to do or what might happen. His opportunity for procedural defense and motions, etc., is long passed, other than what is going to be raised in his defense during the trial. His lawyer should have answered all his questions long ago.

in this line I work I find many people call the arraignment 'trial,' ... hopefully the case is at an earlier stage than you believe. If not, a new attorney representing your friend would have to delay the trial. Good luck!