CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant Joshua W. Blocker pled no contest to eight counts of second degree robbery and admitted strike, serious felony, and personal use of a deadly weapon allegations. The trial court sentenced defendant to a stipulated term of 30 years in state prison.
On appeal, defendant contends the abstract of judgment contains an erroneous reference to a restitution order that was not part of the trial court’s pronouncement of judgment. We remand for a restitution hearing.

Father, Robert G., appeals the juvenile court’s summary denial of his Welfare & Institutions Code section 388[1] petition. He contends the court erred in denying him the opportunity to have a full hearing on his petition. We find father did not make a prima facie case that modification and further reunification services were in the minor’s best interest. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.

This case comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110 (Kelly). Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, we affirm the judgment.
We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (Kelly, supra, 40 Cal.4th at p. 124.)
On July 25, 2011, 18-year-old defendant Angel Miguel Fielding was found by officers in the carport outside the apartment where a man and his 17-year-old daughter lived. Defendant had red, watery eyes, slurred speech and an odor of alcohol on his person. Defendant had previously dated the daughter; when the relationship ended, defendant showed up unannounced and uninvited at their residence. One time, he was found in the daughter’s bedroom with a BB gun. He also left several harassing messages on her phone, and threatened to shoot her after he had been arrested for trespassing at her apartment.

This case comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110 (Kelly). Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, we affirm the judgment.
We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (Kelly, supra, 40 Cal.4th at p. 124.)
On August 4, 2011, pursuant to a plea bargain, defendant Prince Anthony Barragan pled no contest to assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)) in exchange for the dismissal of a second related charge, a promise of no state prison at the outset, and an agreement that if he successfully completed three years of a five-year probation period, the prosecution would have no objection to the court’s reducing the offense to a misdemeanor.
Following defendant’s change of plea, he waived his right to a probation report and the court suspended imposition of sentence and placed him on formal probation for five years, conditioned upon, among other things, service of 90 days in county jail. The court imposed $200 restitution fines in accordance with Penal Code sections 1202.4 and 1202.44, a $30 conviction assessment, a $40 court security fee, and a $4 emergency medical air transportation fee. The court later imposed probation supervision costs of $1,320, payable at $22 per month.[1]

J.O., mother of the minors, appeals from orders of the juvenile court denying her petitions for modification and terminating her parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 388, 395.)[1] Mother contends the juvenile court abused its discretion in denying the petitions for modification and erred in failing to apply the beneficial relationship exception to avoid termination of her parental rights. We shall affirm.

Defendant Tom Curtis Bryant was charged with three counts of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 187, subd. (a));[1] in each count it was alleged that defendant intentionally discharged a firearm, causing great bodily injury (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)), and committed the offense for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). Counts one and two were based on a shooting on July 9, 2008, and count three was based on a shooting on July 28, 2008.
A jury found defendant guilty of count three and found true its enhancement allegations. As to counts one and two the jury was unable to reach a verdict, and the trial court declared a mistrial as to those counts. Sentenced to state prison for 42 years to life,[2] defendant appeals, contending (1) the trial court erred by admitting certain gang evidence; (2) the trial court erred by not instructing, on its own initiative, on attempted voluntary manslaughter; (3) there was insufficient evidence of great bodily injury; and (4) his sentence is unconstitutionally cruel and unusual. We shall affirm the judgment.

Michelle H., mother of the minor, appeals from orders of the juvenile court dismissing the petition and giving custody of the two-year-old minor to his father. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 390, 395.)[1] Mother contends the order was not supported by substantial evidence and the court failed to make the required findings. We affirm.

A modification decision.

This case involves cross-actions to quiet title in an easement dispute between adjoining landowners -- plaintiff and cross-defendant Arthur E. King (owner of the alleged servient tenement)[1] versus defendant and cross-complainant Zora M. Biagini (owner of the alleged dominant tenement). In a bench trial, the trial court ruled the easement for ingress/egress was extinguished as a result of merger. Specifically, the court ruled that merger extinguished an adjoining easement across a contiguous parcel, which had connected the subject easement to the road. Thus, the subject easement no longer connected to anything.
Biagini, acting in propria persona, appeals, arguing merger was not pleaded and did not occur.[2] King did not cross-appeal from the trial court’s rejection of his alternate theories that the easement was extinguished by abandonment or prescriptive nonuse.
We conclude Biagini fails to meet her burden as appellant to show reversible error, and therefore affirm the judgment.[3]

In October 2000, a jury convicted defendant David Hernandez of eight felonies and found true numerous sentence enhancements in connection with two gang-related shootings in October 1999. On count 4—attempted premeditated murder of Samuel Vasquez—(Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 664)[1] defendant was sentenced to state prison for life with a minimum term of 15 years (§ 186.22, former subd. (b)(4) [now subd. (b)(5)]), plus 25 years to life for personal discharge of a firearm causing great bodily injury (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)). On the remaining counts, the trial court imposed terms totaling 24 years eight months, all to run concurrent with the life term on count 4. Sentences on counts 3 (shooting at an occupied motor vehicle (§ 246)) and 5 (shooting from a motor vehicle (former § 12034, subd. (c) [now § 26100, subd. (c)]) were stayed pursuant to section 654. Defendant was awarded a total of 521 days of presentence credit (453 days of actual custody credit and 68 days of conduct credit) pursuant to section 2933.1.[2]

Plaintiff Diane Colby sued defendant Signature Properties, Inc. (Signature), alleging causes of action arising from her employment and termination with Signature. After the trial court disposed of some of Colby’s causes of action, a jury returned a defense verdict on the remaining causes of action. Colby appeals, representing herself. We conclude that Colby has failed to establish prejudicial error; therefore, we affirm.[1]

Raymond P. Harris, in propria persona, appeals from the probate court’s dismissal of his petition for probate of will of his deceased mother, Carmen Jeanette Jones. The probate court dismissed the probate petition on the ground that the only remaining assets of the decedent were trust assets not subject to probate. This appeal seeks to relitigate prior court orders in conservatorship and trust proceedings by and against Joyce Harris and Terry Harris as trustees/conservators of Mrs. Jones’s trust, person, and estate.[1] The prior orders were the subjects of separate appeals in this court, which were consolidated for oral argument and decision only. (Conservatorship of Jones (Sept. 7, 2011, C062865 & C064672 [nonpub. opn.].) We will affirm the judgment (dismissal order).

Defendants and appellants Juan C. Abelar and Felix Alberto Puerto were convicted by jury in count 1 of carjacking in violation of Penal Code section 215, subdivision (a),[1] and in count 2 with first degree robbery in violation of section 211. The jury further found, as to both counts, that a principal was armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)) and defendants used a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced Abelar to 15 years in state prison. Puerto received a 19-year state prison term.
Defendants filed timely notices of appeal. This court appointed attorneys to represent defendants on appeal. Both appointed counsels filed briefs raising no issues but requesting this court to independently review the record for arguable appellate contentions pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Each defendant was advised by letter from this court of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days. The 30-day period has elapsed as to both defendants, and no supplemental briefs have been received.

Charles Edwin Freeman appeals from orders of the trial court revoking probation. We remand to the trial court to correct an illegal sentence and otherwise affirm.