CA Unpub Decisions

A jury found defendant Anthony Samuel Fulsom guilty of domestic violence (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)) and assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)). The jury also found true several sentencing enhancement allegations. Defendant subsequently filed a motion for a new trial based on juror misconduct. The trial court denied his motion, entered judgment, and sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of 11 years in state prison.
On appeal, defendant contends trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to improper remarks made by the prosecutor in closing argument. Defendant further contends the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial. We conclude defendant failed to meet his burden on appeal for both claims and affirm the judgment.

Anthony Daniel appeals from the judgment after the trial court found that he was a mentally disordered offender (MDO). (Pen. Code, § 2962 et seq.) Appellant’s commitment offense was felony vandalism, i.e., kicking out a police car window while the car was in motion. (§ 594, subd. (a).) Appellant contends that the evidence does not support the trial court’s finding that the offense satisfied the force or violence criterion of section 2962, subdivision (e)(2)(P) or (Q). We affirm.

Patrick James Cavanaugh appeals the judgment entered after he pled no contest to removing or taking an officer’s weapon other than a firearm (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (b)). In exchange for his plea, the trial court sentenced him to two years in state prison and awarded 632 days of presentence custody credit.
Appellant has been a patient at Atascadero State Hospital (ASH) since 2013. On December 17, 2015, officers opened the door to appellant’s room and appellant pushed the door against one of the officer’s arms. The officer dropped a can of pepper spray and appellant retrieved it.

Appellant Robert Yardley and Respondent Roman Zaretsky each owned 50 percent of the outstanding shares in Yardley-Zaretsky, Inc. (YZI), an engineering and construction firm Zaretsky formed with Yardley’s father to perform installation and other work on specialized heating, air conditioning, and ventilation equipment. The products YZI installed were sold by a second company that Yardley’s father formed, George Yardley Company (GYC). Zaretsky served as YZI’s president and a GYC salesperson. When his father died, Yardley assumed control of GYC while Zaretsky continued to run YZI. Although he held half of its outstanding shares, Yardley had no direct involvement in YZI’s business.

Colin Taylor Volpe appeals from the judgment entered after his conviction by a jury of second degree robbery. (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c).) The trial court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed appellant on probation on condition that he serve 482 days in county jail. The court ordered that the jail term be deemed served.
Appellant contends that the trial court erroneously modified three standard jury instructions. He also contends that the court gave an erroneous advisement to the jury after it had announced that it was deadlocked. We affirm.

Fernando Adriel Guzman petitioned under Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act (Pen. Code, § 1170.18), to recall his felony conviction sentence and to resentence him to a misdemeanor. The trial court denied the petition on the ground that reducing Guzman’s sentence from a felony to a misdemeanor would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, which is a statutory basis for denying Proposition 47 petitions. In making its finding of future dangerousness, the trial court relied heavily on a probation officer’s report that was prepared after Guzman was charged in this case, but that was not part of his record of conviction and that contains hearsay.

Fernando Adriel Guzman petitioned under Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act (Pen. Code, § 1170.18), to recall his felony conviction sentence and to resentence him to a misdemeanor. The trial court denied the petition on the ground that reducing Guzman’s sentence from a felony to a misdemeanor would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, which is a statutory basis for denying Proposition 47 petitions. In making its finding of future dangerousness, the trial court relied heavily on a probation officer’s report that was prepared after Guzman was charged in this case, but that was not part of his record of conviction and that contains hearsay.

Javier Isais Chavez appeals from the judgment after a jury convicted him of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)) and corporal injury to his girlfriend, Jane Doe 1 (§ 273.5, subd. (a)). The jury also found true the allegation that Chavez personally inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (e)).

Mark Anthony Burboa appeals his conviction by jury for possession of a controlled substance in a jail facility. (Pen. Code, § 4573.6.) In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found that appellant had suffered a prior strike (§§ 667, subds. (c)(1) & (e)(1), 1170.12, subds. (a)(1) & (c)(1)) and had served three prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). Appellant was sentenced to seven years state prison. On appeal, appellant contends that the trial court erred in receiving evidence that he entered a plea in an unrelated case and was sentenced and remanded to jail the day he committed the charged offense. We affirm.

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP and Fred Bennett appeal from an order denying their motion to compel arbitration of a legal malpractice action filed by respondents, Summerland Falls, LLC (Summerland), Jack Riley, and Paul Winkler. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.) Appellants provided legal services to respondents pursuant to an Engagement Letter that had an arbitration provision which was initialed by Summerland and Riley but not Winkler. The trial court found that Winkler was not a signator to the arbitration agreement and that arbitration of the action with respect to Summerland and Riley would create the possibility of conflicting rulings on common issues of law and fact. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2, subd. (c).) We affirm.

Gary Salzman, in pro. per., appeals from an order of the trial court denying his motion for an order for the sale of real property belonging to Dawn Phillips, against whom Salzman previously had obtained a default money judgment. Salzman contends he complied with the statutory procedures for enforcing a money judgment and that the trial court erred in denying his motion. We agree and therefore reverse.

On a date undisclosed to this court, Nadejda L. Rozanova and Denis Klimov (collectively, appellants) brought suit against their neighbor, Rafael S. Uribe (respondent), and in May 2013, respondent filed a cross-complaint against appellants. In April 2015, appellants, who are self-represented, filed a motion to disqualify respondent’s counsel, Roy Gunter III (Gunter). The motion was denied. In August 2015, appellants filed a second motion to disqualify Gunter, contending that he had engaged in ethical improprieties, specifically, making a number of false and misleading statements in connection with the litigation. That motion was also denied. Appellants have sought review of this decision by appeal. (See Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. v. Tracinda Corp. (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1832, 1838 (MGM) [order denying motion to disqualify is an appealable order].) We will affirm.

Appellant E.J., mother of the minor A.R., appeals from the juvenile court’s order denying her petition for modification. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 388, 395.) During the pendency of this appeal, however, this court affirmed the termination of mother’s parental rights to A.R. (In re A.R. (Sept. 15, 2016, C078891) [nonpub. opn.].) Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal as moot.

Appellant E.J., mother of the minor A.R., appeals from the juvenile court’s order denying her petition for modification. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 388, 395.) During the pendency of this appeal, however, this court affirmed the termination of mother’s parental rights to A.R. (In re A.R. (Sept. 15, 2016, C078891) [nonpub. opn.].) Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal as moot.