CA Unpub Decisions

Minor appellant A.R. (minor) appeals an order on the grounds that the court did not comply with Welfare and Institutions Code section 786 with regard to minor’s dismissed juvenile delinquency petition. In particular, minor asserts the court should have deemed his arrest never to have occurred. The Attorney General concedes minor is entitled to relief.
The order is reversed insofar as the court did not deem minor’s arrest not to have occurred. The matter is remanded to the juvenile court to enter a new and different order consistent with Welfare and Institutions Code section 786 as amended.

Minor appellant D.P. (minor) appeals an order on the grounds that the court did not comply with Welfare and Institutions Code section 786 with regard to minor’s dismissed juvenile delinquency petition. In particular, minor asserts the court should have deemed his arrest never to have occurred. The Attorney General concedes minor is entitled to relief.
The order is reversed insofar as the court did not deem minor’s arrest not to have occurred. The matter is remanded to the juvenile court to enter a new and different order consistent with Welfare and Institutions Code section 786 as amended.

In People v. Tate (Aug. 5, 2004, F043819), an unpublished opinion, this court affirmed the felony conviction of defendant Earl Thomas Tate for being an ex-felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, former § 12021, subd. (a)(1)) and his misdemeanor conviction for possession of narcotics paraphernalia (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364). Defendant had two prior serious or violent felony convictions within the meaning of the three strikes law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and was sentenced to a term of 25 years to life. On December 19, 2014, pursuant to the resentencing provisions of the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (Proposition 36), the trial court heard and denied defendant’s petition, finding defendant ineligible. We affirm the trial court’s ruling.

In People v. Fadden (Jan. 4, 2007, F049795), an unpublished opinion, this court affirmed defendant Barrett Juston Fadden’s conviction for possession of a weapon while confined in a penal institution (Pen. Code, § 4502, subd. (a)). On November 4, 2014, pursuant to the resentencing provision of Proposition 36, the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (Proposition 36), the trial court heard and denied defendant’s petition for resentencing. The Court affirm the trial court’s ruling.

Defendant and appellant Louie Arello Cordero petitioned to have his 2013 conviction for second degree commercial burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) reduced to a misdemeanor pursuant to the Safe Neighborhood and Schools Act, enacted by the voters as Proposition 47 in the November 2014 election. The trial court denied the petition, finding that defendant was not eligible for relief because he had burglarized a closed business. (See § 459.5 [added by Proposition 47, defining offense of shoplifting].)
In this appeal, defendant asserts three claims of error with respect to the trial court’s denial of his petition. Court reject each of these arguments, and affirm.

Plaintiff and appellant The Inland Oversight Committee is, according to its complaint, a nonprofit organization with at least one member who “resides in and pays real-property taxes within the geographical jurisdiction of the City of Chino,” and has an interest in “ensuring that City’s public officials comply with all conflict-of-interest and public-contract laws and maintaining open, transparent government decision-making.” (Some capitalization omitted.) Defendants and respondents Dennis R. Yates, Glenn Duncan, Earl C. Elrod, Tom Haughey, Eunice M. Ulloa, and Rob Burns are public officials for the City of Chino, specifically, members of the city council.
In this appeal, plaintiff challenges the trial court’s ruling granting defendants’ special motion to strike the first amended complaint (FAC) as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (anti-SLAPP motion) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (the anti-SLAPP statute). The Court affirm.

The trial court denied the Proposition 47 petition for resentencing of defendant and appellant Victor Wayne Bates, Jr. (Pen. Code, § 1170.18.) Defendant raises two issues on appeal. First, defendant contends the record of conviction does not support the finding that the value of the property he stole exceeded $950. Second, defendant contends the trial court erred by not providing him notice that he could request a hearing concerning his petition. The Court affirm the judgment.

Plaintiffs and respondents Marlene Garibay (Garibay) and Karina Hernandez (Hernandez) sued defendants and appellants US Law Center, Law Office of Sanjay Sobti, APC (Law Office), and Sanjay Sobti (Sobti) for wrongful termination, discrimination, and infliction of emotional distress. Defendants filed a special motion to strike the complaint as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (known as the anti-SLAPP statute). The trial court denied their motion, and the Court affirm.

In April 2014, plaintiff and appellant Thomas Bodnar (Bodnar) sued defendants and respondents County of Riverside, C. Bianco, C. Harris, J. Whitting and T. Torrenti (defendants) for personal injuries plaintiff allegedly sustained during an arrest on January 6, 2006. The trial court sustained defendants’ demurrer without leave to amend on the grounds that the action was time-barred and plaintiff failed to adequately plead compliance with the Government Tort Claims Act (Gov. Code, § 900 et seq.). Judgment was entered in favor of defendants. The Court conclude that the statute of limitations issue is dispositive and affirm the judgment.

Plaintiff and respondent Michele Barlow obtained a temporary civil harassment restraining order (restraining order) against defendant and appellant Aladdin Dinaali. Defendant contests the issuance of the restraining order, as well as various other orders issued by the trial court. Because the record on appeal does not demonstrate any error, Court affirm.

In this gang-related murder case involving the shooting death of Eddie Barnes, Jr., a jury convicted Cornelius Deshawn Woods of first degree murder (count 1: Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)), unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon (count 2: § 29800, subd. (a)), and active participation in a criminal street gang (count 3: § 186.22, subd. (a)). The jury found to be true allegations that in committing the murder Woods personally used and discharged a firearm, causing death (§ 12022.53, subds. (b)-(d)) and that he committed the murder and unlawfully possessed the firearm (a handgun) for the benefit of, in association with, or at the direction of a criminal street gang with the specific intent to promote, further or assist in criminal conduct by gang members (§ 186.22, subds. (b)(1)(A), (C)). Woods appeals his conviction, asserting five contentions. the Court affirm the judgment.

A jury convicted Melissa Dean-Bauman of second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a); count 1), vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence while intoxicated (§ 191.5, subd. (a); count 2), driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs causing injury (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (a); count 3), felony drunk driving (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (b); count 4), and felony child endangerment (§ 273a, subd. (a); count 5). The jury found true allegations Dean-Bauman inflicted great bodily injury on victims 70 years of age or older in committing counts 2 through 4 (§ 12022.7, subd. (c)).
On appeal, Dean-Baumann contends on various grounds. The People concede the second contention. Therefore, the Court strike the enhancement for count 2. The Court disagree with the other contentions and affirm the judgment in all other respects.

Plaintiff Paul Kelly sued Little Rock Special Needs Trust (Trust) and its beneficiary Paul Matlock (Matlock) for damages. Trust and Matlock, after eventually filing answers to the complaint, responded to Kelly's discovery requests by informing Kelly's counsel they would not answer the discovery. The court granted Kelly's motion to compel certain responses, and to deem all requests for admissions admitted.
One year later, after Matlock and Trust did not comply with the previous discovery order, Kelly moved for terminating sanctions under Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.010, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 2030.290 and 2031.320. The court entered an order granting terminating sanctions and ordered Matlock's answer be set aside and granted Kelly the right to proceed with default judgment proceedings. Matlock has appealed from the judgment.

A jury convicted Chris Anthony Williams and his codefendant, Charnisha Burnettex, of selling a controlled substance. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a).) In addition, the trial court found true allegations Williams had a prior narcotics sales related conviction (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (c); Pen. Code, § 1203.07, subd. (a)(11)), five prior strike convictions (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12), and three prior prison commitment convictions (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). After striking the prior narcotics sales related conviction finding and two of the prior prison conviction findings, the court sentenced Williams to five years in prison.
Williams appeals, contending we must reverse the judgment because the court violated his right to due process of law and a fair trial by excluding evidence of a recorded conversation between him and Burnettex after their arrest. Court are unpersuaded by this contention and affirm the judgment.