CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant Adam Clinton Lentner appeals from his conviction on one count of felony vandalism (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (b)(1)) and 180-day jail sentence. Defendant argues: 1) the evidence seized from his home should have been suppressed because the search warrant contained both stale and false information; 2) the separate incidents of misdemeanor tagging should not have been aggregated into one felony count; 3) the jury instructions on aggregation were inadequate; and 4) the trial court should have but did not instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of misdemeanor vandalism, and this prejudiced defendant. As discussed below, Court reject each of these contentions.

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Randall Donald White, Judge. Affirmed.
Younger Law Corp., Connie L. Younger; Holstein, Taylor & Unitt and Brian C. Unitt for Intervener and Appellant.
Peter K. Levine and Albert Gopin for Plaintiff and Respondent.
In 1991, John Von Neumann obtained a default judgment against Charlotte Vega, declaring that he was not the father of her son, John Vega.[1] (We will refer to John Von Neumann as Von Neumann, to John Vega as John, and to Charlotte Vega as Charlotte.) In 2009, John intervened in the long-dormant action and moved to set aside the default judgment. The trial court denied the motion. John appeals.
We find no error. John was not entitled to relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 473.5 because he was not a party when the judgment was entered, and it was not â€

Defendant and appellant Demetrice James Maxwell was charged with possession of marijuana for sale. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11359, count 1.) Pursuant to a plea agreement, count 1 was dismissed, and a new charge of possession of concentrated cannibis (Health & Saf. Code, § 11357, subd. (a), count 3) was added.[1] Defendant pled guilty to count 3, on the condition that he would be sentenced to three years in state prison, but the sentence would be suspended, and he would be placed on probation. On April 7, 2009, the court sentenced defendant to three years' probation (suspended), and specified that defendant was to serve 180 days in the San Bernardino County jail, with credit for 13 days served. Defendant was ordered to serve the balance of his sentence by participating in a weekend work release program, commencing no later than April 24, 2009.

Before us are three appeals, consolidated by stipulation of the parties and previous order of this court. The appeals arise from a judgment and postjudgment orders in a civil action for fraud, breach of contract, and related causes of action.

A jury convicted appellant Anthony Burciaga of the first degree murder of Theodore Betts. The jury also found that the murder was committed in the course of a robbery and that Burciaga personally and intentionally used a firearm. Burciaga contends (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence and in failing sua sponte to instruct the jury on second degree murder and involuntary manslaughter; (2) trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance; and (3) cumulative error. Court reject Burciaga's contentions and affirm the judgment.

A modification decision.

A jury convicted Hector Hugo Ramirez (appellant) of one count of committing continuous sexual abuse of a child (Pen. Code, § 288.5, subd. (a)). The court sentenced appellant to the middle term of 12 years in state prison.
On appeal, appellant contends that the trial court erred by allowing evidence of prior acts under Evidence Code sections 1101 and 1108, and that it deprived him of due process. In the alternative, he argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. He also contends the trial court erred when it instructed with CALCRIM No. 1191. Court disagree and affirm.

At the conclusion of a jurisdictional hearing, the juvenile court found true that appellant committed second degree murder and personally and intentionally discharged a firearm. The court found not true the criminal street gang allegation. At a dispositional hearing, appellant was declared a ward of the court and the court determined the maximum time appellant could be confined was 40 years to life, consisting of a term of 15 years to life on the second degree murder finding and a term of 25 years to life on the firearm enhancement finding. Restitution was ordered in the amount of $4,938. Appellant appeals on the sole ground that there was insufficient evidence to support the court's finding that appellant shot the victim. Court find there was sufficient evidence to support the finding and affirm.

In case No. 08CM2673 appellant, Fernando Junior Valles, pled no contest to assault with a deadly weapon and by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a))[1] and admitted a great bodily injury enhancement (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). In case No. 09CM1834, Valles pled guilty to possession for sale of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378).
On August 14, 2009, the court sentenced Valles to an aggregate term of six years eight months in both cases.
On appeal Valles contends the court: 1) violated the terms of his plea bargain in case No. 08CM2673; and 2) erred in imposing a fine pursuant to Government Code section 70373 in case No. 08CM2673. Court affirm.

Petitioners Citizens for Responsible Growth, an unincorporated association, and Santos Luevano, an individual,[1] appeal from the denial of their petition for writ of mandate, which seeks to force respondent City of Bakersfield (city) to comply with certain provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code section 21000 et. seq. The association is seeking to stop construction of a 137,609-square-foot shopping center in southwest Bakersfield, at the corner of Panama Lane and Ashe Road, whose primary tenant would be an 88,988 square foot WinCo discount grocery store (project).

A jury convicted appellant, Alex Noel Aguilar, of two felonies: first degree burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460, subd. (a);[1] count 1) and vandalism (§ 594, subd. (a); count 2). The jury also found true an allegation that a person other than an accomplice was present in the residence at the time of the burglary charged in count 1 (§ 667.5, subd. (c)(21)). The court imposed the six-year upper term on count 1, and declared that offense to be a violent felony within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (c)(21). On count 2 the court imposed, and stayed pursuant to section 654, a term of two years. The court also ordered that appellant pay $9,219.56 in victim restitution, pursuant to section 1202.4, subdivision (f), and awarded appellant 233 days of presentence credit, consisting of 203 days of actual time credit and 30 days of conduct credit.
Appellant's appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellant has not responded to this court's invitation to submit additional briefing. As we explain below, we have determined the court erred in its award of presentence credit. Court will modify the judgment accordingly, and otherwise affirm.

David and Cassie Downs (hereafter referred to collectively and in the singular and masculine as â€

Following a contested jurisdictional hearing, the juvenile court sustained a petition alleging J. S., a minor, committed arson. It declared him a ward of the court and placed him on probation. Defendant contends the court's exclusion of third party culpability evidence deprived him of his right to present a defense. Finding no error, Court affirm.

Orange County Social Services Agency (SSA) filed a Welfare and Institutions Code section 387 petition after Yuridia S. (Mother) absconded with her special needs son, Jesus C., to North Carolina following a tumultuous two years of family maintenance services. The juvenile court denied Mother reunification services and removed Jesus from her custody. In this writ petition, Mother contends there was insufficient evidence of danger to support the order removing Jesus from her custody. Court conclude the contention lacks merit, and Court deny the writ petition.