CA Unpub Decisions

Mother is a parent of three children by different fathers: Josiah P. (born in June 2007), J.F. (born in June 2010), and Adam P. (born in October 2013). None of the fathers are involved in the present appeal.
In July 2016, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) received a referral reporting that Mother abused alcohol for several years, and “drinks a lot on weekends with gang afflicted friends.” Further, the referrer reported that Mother sometimes left home and would “not show up for several days.” Mother would not tell others where she was going, or when she would be back, and would leave the children with their maternal grandmother.

Aracely R. appeals from a December 2015 order awarding both parents joint legal and physical custody of their two daughters. She contends the trial court misapplied Family Code section 3044 in awarding joint custody after finding that the children’s father, Richard M., committed domestic violence against her. Aracely does not, however, appeal from the subsequent November 2016 judgment entered after a two-day trial concerning custody of and visitation with the parties’ children. We conclude the 2015 custody order is not appealable and was superseded by the 2016 judgment. We therefore dismiss the appeal.

Appellant Carlos Guadalupe Reyes raises contentions of trial court error following his conviction of the stalking, robbery, and first degree murder of his estranged wife. For the reasons discussed below, the judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for resentencing.
Viewed in accordance with the usual rules of appellate review (People v. Ochoa (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1199, 1206), the evidence established the following.

Appointed counsel for defendant Christopher Douglas Oerding has asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment.

Plaintiffs Shafar Toranji and his wife Firoozeh Arghavani (collectively plaintiffs) sued defendants Chris Sungduk Lim, Justin Jinhyong Bae, and Best 4U, Inc. (collectively defendants) after Lim, their real estate broker, failed to timely communicate a competing and ultimately successful offer to purchase a home in Newport Coast. Following a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment that awarded plaintiffs $409,846 in damages for that omission; the court’s damages determination was based on the difference between the property’s fair market value ($2,659,846) and the amount the court found plaintiffs would have paid for the property ($2.25 million).

Willis was convicted of violating Penal Code section 148.10, resisting a peace officer resulting in serious bodily injury to the officer, and a third strike sentence of 25 years to life was imposed. On November 7, 2014, Willis petitioned for a recall of his sentence and resentencing pursuant to section 1170.126. After a hearing, the superior court denied the petition on the grounds Willis was ineligible. Willis appeals. We affirm.

Max Wade appeals from a judgment sentencing him to prison after a jury convicted him of attempted premeditated murder with an allegation that he had personally discharged a firearm (Pen. Code, §§ 187/664, subd. (a), 12022.53, subd. (c)), shooting at an occupied motor vehicle (Pen. Code, § 246), taking or driving a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), and receiving a stolen vehicle (Pen. Code, § 496d, subd. (a)). The first two counts arose from an incident in which he pulled up to a truck while riding on a motorcycle and fired several shots toward the two teenagers inside. The last two counts arose from his possession of a Lamborghini that had been stolen from a car dealership about a year before the shooting.

Defendant Byron Keith Street fatally shot Patrick Odoi-Kyene. The two men were security guards assigned to a large apartment complex, but Street was off duty and was discovered by Odoi-Kyene and another guard taking their time records. Evidence existed that Street also vandalized several vehicles parked in a parking garage at the complex, scratching angry remarks aimed at Odoi-Kyene into them. A jury found Street guilty of first degree murder, and found true that the murder was felony murder in the commission of burglary, that a burglary special circumstance applied, and that during the murder, Street used a firearm. It also found Street guilty of burglary with intent to commit vandalism.

Defendant and appellant Ricardo Teran Santos is serving a 10-year, second-strike prison term for stabbing his girlfriend in the forearm with a screwdriver. Defendant challenges the jury’s “true” findings on the great bodily injury enhancement (Pen. Code, § 12022.7) to his convictions for domestic violence and assault with a deadly weapon. Because the jury could reasonably have gone either way on the evidence presented, we affirm.

Defendant Dennis Alan Rogge, who was serving a sentence consisting of an indeterminate life term plus a determinate term for 1999 convictions, which included two first degree burglary convictions (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460, subd. (a)), filed a petition for resentencing as to two other convictions under Code section 1170.18, asserting that those two offenses would have been misdemeanors if they had been committed after voters approved Proposition 47. The trial court denied the petition on the ground that each of those 1999 burglary convictions constituted a “prior conviction” of the “super strike” offense described in section 667, subdivision (e)(2)(C)(iv)(VIII) (hereafter 667(e)(2)(C)(iv)(VIII)). Consequently, the court found that defendant was disqualified from relief by those burglary convictions pursuant to section 1170.18, subdivision (i) (hereafter 1170.18(i)).

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Eder Gilnar Rodriguez pled guilty to one count of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211). At sentencing, pursuant to the plea agreement, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Rodriguez on probation subject to various conditions, including that he serve 365 days in local custody.

Defendant Willie Orsillis Rhodes appeals a judgment convicting him of spousal abuse and other related offenses and sentencing him to 17 years in prison. On appeal, he contends the court erred by instructing the jury with the standard flight instruction pursuant to CALCRIM No. 372 and by failing to instruct the jury on how to consider circumstantial evidence in accordance with CALCRIM No. 224. He also contends the court abused its discretion in refusing to strike his prior strike conviction. We shall affirm.

A jury found defendant and appellant Daniel Alberto Mejia guilty of carjacking (Pen. Code, § 215, subd. (a); count 1), evading a peace officer by reckless driving (Veh. Code, § 2800.2; count 2), possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1); count 3), and unlawful possession of ammunition (§ 30305, subd. (a); count 4). The jury also found true that defendant personally used a firearm during the commission of count 1 (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)). In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true that defendant had suffered a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)) and a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (c) & (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)).

A jury convicted defendants Jordy Roman Martinez, Juan Carlos Covarrubias, and Andrew Gomez Sanchez of shooting at an occupied motor vehicle (Pen. Code, § 246; count 4), and of being active participants in a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (a); count 5). The jury found defendants committed the shooting for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)), and that a firearm was discharged during the commission of that offense (§ 12022.53, subds. (c), (e)(l)). The court sentenced each defendant to prison for 15 years to life.