CA Unpub Decisions
California Unpublished Decisions
|
Ponani Sukumar entered into a contract with Health Tech Resources, Inc. dba Impact Fitness Systems (Health Tech) whereby Sukumar purchased certain exercise equipment. The equipment was manufactured in Italy by Air Machine Com SRL, an Italian company (SRL). Because he believed the exercise equipment was defective, Sukumar, along with his physical rehabilitation clinic Southern California Stroke Rehabilitation Associates (SCSRA) brought suit against multiple defendants,[1] including Health Tech, Thomas Eggers (Health Tech's president and owner), and SRL. SRL moved to quash service of summons because of a lack of personal jurisdiction, and the court granted the motion.
Sukumar and SCSRA appeal, arguing the court erred in finding that SRL was not subject to personal jurisdiction in California. Specifically, they argue SRL purposefully availed itself of the benefits of doing business in California, their suit relates to SRL's contacts with California, and SRL did not show the superior court's exercise of jurisdiction in this matter would be unreasonable. In the alternative, Sukumar and SCSRA contend SRL waived its jurisdictional objection by engaging in discovery unrelated to jurisdictional issues. We affirm. |
|
Defendant Kim Ashley Tupper pleaded guilty to felony corporal injury of a spouse, cohabitant, or child’s parent (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)).[1] Imposition of sentence was suspended and he was placed on three years’ formal probation. He was continued on probation after admitting to violating his probation by failing to enroll in a batterer’s treatment program. After he admitted to violating probation a second time, the trial court terminated probation and sentenced defendant to three years in state prison with 387 days’ presentence credit (230 actual, 128 conduct, and 29 state custody).[2]
On appeal, defendant contends the trial court failed to award credits for time he spent in a residential rehabilitation facility. We affirm. |
|
Defendant Jody Nicole Bryant pleaded no contest to voluntary manslaughter (Pen. Code, § 192, subd. (a)) in exchange for a sentencing lid of six years in state prison. The trial court sentenced defendant to the six-year lid. Defendant appeals her sentence making a single claim: the trial court failed to rule on the request for judicial notice she submitted in her sentencing statement. We affirm. |
|
After an initial jury deadlocked, a second jury, upon retrial, convicted defendant Christopher Rogers of first degree murder and found he personally discharged a firearm to commit the killing. (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), former 12022.53, subd. (d).)
Sentenced to an aggregate state prison term of 50 years to life, defendant appeals. He contends there is insufficient evidence (1) that he was the killer, and (2) that he deliberated and premeditated. He also claims that (3) the prosecutor engaged in prejudicial misconduct during argument, and (4) he is entitled to 10 additional days of presentence custody credit for actual time served. We agree with defendant about the additional custody credit, but disagree on his three other contentions. Consequently, we shall modify the judgment to add the 10 days of credit, and affirm in all other respects. |
|
A jury found defendant Kenneth John Zimmerman not guilty of first degree murder, but guilty of the second degree murder of his neighbor John O’Sullivan. ( ADDIN BA xc <@ost> xl 9 s DBOXSL000041 xpl 1 l "Pen. Code" Pen. Code, ADDIN BA xc <@osdv> xl 16 s DBOXSL000043 l "§ 187, subd. (a)" § 187, subd. (a).)[1] The jury also found true allegations that in the commission of the murder defendant intentionally and personally discharged a firearm, namely a .25-caliber Raven Arms handgun, causing great bodily injury and death to O’Sullivan within the meaning of ADDIN BA xc <@osdv> xl 33 s DBOXSL000044 l "section 12022.53, subdivision (d)" section 12022.53, subdivision (d), and personally used a firearm within the meaning of ADDIN BA xc <@osdv> xl 35 s DBOXSL000045 l "section 12022.5, subdivision (a)(1)" section 12022.5, subdivision (a). The jury found defendant not guilty of making criminal threats against O’Sullivan’s wife, and was unable to reach a unanimous verdict on a charge that defendant falsely imprisoned her. The prosecution dismissed the false imprisonment charge in the furtherance of justice.
The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of 40 years to life in state prison, consisting of 15 years to life for second degree murder, and a consecutive 25 years to life on the ADDIN BA xc <@osdv> xl 33 s DBOXSL000046 l "section 12022.53, subdivision (b)" section 12022.53, subdivision (d), enhancement. Defendant’s sentence on the ADDIN BA xc <@$osdv> xl 35 s DBOXSL000045 section 12022.5, subdivision (a), enhancement was stayed. Defendant appeals, contending the trial court committed various evidentiary and instructional errors. Having reviewed the record, we shall conclude defendant’s contentions lack merit, and that any potential errors were harmless. Accordingly, we shall affirm the judgment. |
|
Francisco B. (Father) and Adriana T. (Mother) have two sons, Francisco B. (born February 1999, hereinafter referred to as Frankie) and Adrian B. (born March 2000). Father appeals from the juvenile’s court orders sustaining allegations in the juvenile dependency petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300.[1] We affirm.
|
|
This is the second time this court has considered an appeal in this matter. The first appeal was considered in appeal No. B226483, pertaining to Crystal A. (“Motherâ€), the mother of minor Daniel R. Mother appealed from the dispositional order of the juvenile court denying Mother reunification services pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code[1] section 361.5, subdivisions (b)(10) and (b)(11). The juvenile court’s findings were grounded on failure to reunify with Daniel R.’s siblings and Mother had not made a reasonable effort to address her drug problems that led to the removal of those children, leading the juvenile court to conclude that Mother’s parental rights should be terminated. Mother had argued the juvenile court’s dispositional order was not supported by substantial evidence. Mother asserted she had “worked to correct†her substance abuse problems. This court rejected Mother’s arguments and affirmed the order of the juvenile court in an opinion filed on June 13, 2011. Daniel R. Sr. (“Fatherâ€)[2] was not a party in appeal No. B226483. Consequently, this opinion addresses issues peculiar to Father’s appeal. We occasionally make reference to Mother’s prior appeal but only when context so requires.
|
|
Welfare & Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (c)[1] authorizes the juvenile court to take jurisdiction of a child who is either suffering or at substantial risk of suffering "serious emotional damage, evidenced by severe anxiety, depression, withdrawal, or untoward aggressive behavior . . . as a result of the conduct of the parent."[2] Peter D. appeals from the jurisdictional orders declaring his daughter, A., and three sons, Peter, James and Joseph, to be dependents of the juvenile court, based on its findings that they suffered or were at risk of suffering serious emotional harm. (§ 300, subd. (c).) Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the court's findings. We affirm. |
|
Appellant Joann H. (Mother) has four children: Amanda M. (born 1996), C.M. (born 1998), J.G.-1 (born 2010), and J.G.-2 (born 2011). Appellant Jason G. (Father) is the father of J.G.-1 and J.G.-2. (A fifth child, Jalyn G., born in 2007, died in July 2011.) Amanda’s and C.M.’s father, P.M., is not a party to these proceedings. On November 15, 2011, the Department of Children and Family Services (Department) filed a petition pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (a), (b), (c), and (j).[1] On March 22, 2012, the juvenile court sustained some of the allegations in the petition pursuant to section 300, subdivisions (b), (c), and (j), and declared all four children to be dependents and removed them from Mother’s and Father’s custody and care. Mother and Father each filed notices of appeal. We affirm the orders of the juvenile court.
|
|
After jury trial, defendant and appellant Louis Rudolph Price, Jr., was convicted of two counts of possession of a controlled substance. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350.) In a bifurcated proceeding, the court found true an allegation that appellant had suffered a prior "strike" conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and three allegations that appellant had served a prior prison term. (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b).) He was sentenced to a total of 7 years in state prison. The evidence at trial was as follows: Los Angeles Police Officer Jesus Toris was patrolling the area around San Julian Street in downtown Los Angeles, an area known for sale and consumption of cocaine base. He saw appellant approach a woman, engage in a conversation with her, accept money from her, then take out a piece of plastic wrap and hand her a substance which appeared to be cocaine base. She put it in her mouth and left. Seven to ten minutes later, after attempting to find and detain the woman, Officer Toris observed appellant engage in a similar transaction with a man. Officer Toris attempted to find and detain the man. He could not find the man, and so approached appellant, who dropped plastic wrap containing cocaine base on the sidewalk. Testing later confirmed that the substance on the plastic wrap was cocaine base. Officer Victor Campbell, Officer Toris's partner, testified similarly, though not identically. |
|
Byung Moon Choi appeals from a judgment entered in favor of Jae R. Ryu following a bench trial on Ryu’s action for breach of contract. The judgment awarded Ryu $135,000 in damages. Choi contends that (1) the trial court committed reversible error in failing to issue a statement of decision; (2) the trial court failed to weigh all relevant evidence; and (3) there is no substantial evidence to support the judgment. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for a new trial on damages.
|
|
Appellants Eddie Betancourt and Said Riley were convicted, following a jury trial, of one count of first degree murder and one count of second murder, both in violation of Penal Code section 187, subdivision (a),[1] and one count of second degree robbery in violation of section 211. The jury convicted Riley of an additional count of second degree robbery. The jury found true the special circumstance allegation that appellants were convicted of more than one offense of murder in the current proceeding within the meaning of section 190.2, subdivision (a)(3). The jury also found true the allegations that Betancourt personally and intentionally discharged a firearm, causing great bodily injury and death within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivisions (b), (c) and (d) in the commission of the first degree murder and personally and intentionally used and discharged a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivisions (b) and (c) in the commission of the second degree murder. The jury found the section 12022.53 allegations not true as to Riley. The jury found true as to both appellants the allegations that a principal was armed with a firearm within the meaning of section 12022, subdivision (a)(1) in the commission of the murders. The jury found the section 12022, subdivision (a)(1) allegations not true for the robberies. Riley admitted that he had suffered a prior serious felony conviction within the meaning of section 667, subdivision (a)(1) and the "Three Strikes" law, and had served a prior prison term within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b).
|
|
A jury found defendant and appellant Patricia Araujo Gomez (Patricia) guilty of the second degree murder of her brother. On appeal, she argues that the trial court improperly refused to instruct the jury on imperfect and perfect self-defense and that evidence relevant to those defenses was improperly excluded. She also argues that the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct during closing arguments. We reject these arguments and affirm the judgment.
|
Actions
Category Stats
Listings: 77266
Regular: 77266
Last listing added: 06:28:2023
Regular: 77266
Last listing added: 06:28:2023
