CA Unpub Decisions

Mark E. (Father) seeks extraordinary writ review of a juvenile court order terminating family reunification services and setting the matter for a permanent plan hearing. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452.)[1] We deny the petition for extraordinary writ.

Petitioner Achilles Corelleone entered a nolo contendere plea to three counts of participating in an act of oral copulation by a person over 21 years of age with a person under the age of 16 (Pen. Code, § 288a, subd. (b)(2)) and one count of participation in an act of sodomy by a person over the age of 21 with a person under the age of 16. (Pen. Code,
§ 286, subd. (b)(2).) Two other counts (two for sodomy, one for oral copulation by force or fear) were dismissed pursuant to the plea agreement. Petitioner was sentenced to an agreed-upon term of five years in state prison. The sentence included a requirement that upon his release, petitioner register as a sex offender. (Pen. Code, § 290.) We affirmed the judgment of conviction on January 31, 2011. (People v. Corelleone, (Jan. 31, 2011, B223186) [nonpub. opn.].)[1]

Meghan F. (â€

The juvenile court sustained a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition[1] alleging that Jeremy J. (appellant) had committed the offense of attempted petty theft (Pen. Code, §§ 664/484, subd. (a)). This was appellant's third offense and the juvenile court set the maximum term of confinement at three years six months. Appellant contends the following on appeal: (1) the juvenile court incorrectly calculated his maximum term of confinement; and (2) one condition of appellant's probation--specifically, that he not possess narcotics--is unconstitutionally vague and/or overbroad. We affirm the judgment as modified.

B.T., a minor, appeals from the order of wardship (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) entered following a finding that he received stolen property in violation of Penal Code section 496, subdivision (a). (All subsequent statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted.) B.T. contends the evidence was insufficient to establish he knew the property had been stolen. We disagree.

Attorney James Li represented Michael Kin Wing Chui in this quiet title action and extended to Chui a line of credit to finance the litigation. In exchange, Chui gave Li deeds of trust to the subject property. After an adverse verdict and orders partitioning the property by sale and distributing the proceeds, Li, not Chui, moved to vacate the judgment. The trial court denied the motion.
Li appeals from the judgment and the order denying his motion to vacate the judgment, on several grounds. He contends he has standing to appeal because Chui's equity in the property will be insufficient to cover his legal fees. We conclude Li lacks standing to appeal from the judgment and his motion to vacate was properly denied.

J.D. (Mother) challenges the sufficiency of the evidence underlying the juvenile court's order asserting jurisdiction over her son Joshua. Mother also disputes the order removing Joshua from her custody, and the adequacy of the notices to the Cherokee tribes under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). The jurisdiction and disposition orders are supported by substantial evidence. We remand the case for proper notice to be given under the ICWA.

Judi Yvonne Pollette was charged by information with possession for sale of methamphetamine (count 1 - Health and Saf. Code, § 11378); possession of a firearm by a felon (count 2 - Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1); maintaining a place for selling or using methamphetamine and marijuana (count 3 - Health & Saf. Code, § 11366); and possession of ammunition by a felon (count 4 - Pen. Code, § 12316, subd. (b)(1)). It was alleged that she suffered a prior conviction and served a prior prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)), and that she had suffered two prior convictions for possession of a controlled substance for sale pursuant to Health and Safety Code sections 11378 and 11370.2, subdivision (c).

Defendant, Marcus Hairston appeals from the judgment entered after the trial court revoked his probation in two drug cases. We modify the judgment and affirm.

On July 8, 2010, appellant Allen Voightman was heard rummaging in the detached garage of Kenneth Jones. Finding the lock on the garage door damaged, Jones pried open the door with a crowbar and demanded that Voightman get out. When Voightman reached the entrance to the garage, Jones grabbed him and threw him to the ground. They fought, then Voightman broke away and ran. Jones and a neighbor pursued and eventually captured him.

Plaintiff, CFM Asset Management, Inc., appeals from an October 19, 2010 ruling granting the motion to quash service of summons of defendants, Colin Sholes doing business as Blue Star Media Limited and Rose Success LLC. Plaintiff contends: Mr. Sholes consented to California jurisdiction under the terms of a contract entered into between plaintiff and Blue Star Media Limited; equitable estoppel principles preclude Mr. Sholes from denying the enforceability of the contract because he led plaintiff to believe that he signed the agreement; the trial court abused its discretion in denying leave to amend the petition to compel arbitration and a request for a continuance to permit jurisdictional discovery. We disagree and affirm the order granting defendants' motion to quash.

A petition was filed against appellant under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 alleging one felony count of possession of a firearm by a minor (Pen. Code, § 12101, subd. (a)(1)). Appellant's motion to suppress evidence was denied. Appellant thereafter admitted the truth of the allegation. The court found the allegation true and sustained the petition, declaring the offense a felony and ordering appellant placed in a Camp Community Placement program, with physical confinement not to exceed three years.
Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, contending that his motion to suppress should have been granted. We find that denial of the motion was proper, and accordingly affirm.

Kevin Daniel Lynch was charged with possession of a firearm by a felon (count 1 - Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1));[1] receiving stolen property (count 2 - § 496, subd. (a)); and possession of ammunition (count 3 - § 12316, subd. (b)(1)). He moved to suppress certain evidence at the preliminary hearing pursuant to section 1538.5. His motion was denied. He later renewed his motion, and it was again denied. Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant entered a plea of guilty to counts 1 and 2. Count 3 was dismissed. The trial court imposed a total term of two years in state prison. This consisted of concurrent two-year sentences on counts one and two.[2]

Isaac P., a minor, appeals from the order declaring him a ward of the court (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) entered following his admission that he committed one act of vandalism causing over $400 in damage (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a)). The juvenile court ordered Isaac P. placed home on probation. He contends one of the conditions of his probation is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. We order the challenged probation condition stricken, and otherwise affirm.