CA Unpub Decisions

Mashhour Khoury sued Maher Martha for negligence and failure to hold workers compensation insurance after he fell through a ceiling at the premises of a disbanded bakery where he had previously been employed by Martha. He appeals from a judgment in favor of Martha on a jury verdict finding Martha was not negligent and appellant was not working as an employee at the time of the accident. Appellant contends the trial court erred in permitting evidence of his prior use of alcohol and drugs to be introduced at trial and in denying a motion to exclude testimony from witnesses who were allegedly not disclosed by the defense. Court affirm.

Tony Shavers appeals from a judgment entered after he pled of guilty to the offense of robbery. His court-appointed counsel has filed a brief raising no legal issues and requesting our independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.

Appellant Sal Avina appeals from judgments entered against him in the two actions brought against respondent, attorney John M. Gerro. The first action -- for attorney malpractice -- ended in summary judgment. The second action, alleging breach of contract, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty, ended in a judgment of dismissal after the trial court sustained respondents demurrer without leave to amend, on the ground that the judgment in the first action barred the second. Court consider the two appeals together for purposes of oral argument and decision. In appeal case No. B204350 (the first action), we find no triable issue of fact as to causation, and affirm the summary judgment. As lack of causation is dispositive, we do not reach the other grounds for the motion, or other issues raised by appellant. With regard to appeal case No. B205705 (the second action), appellant purports to appeal from an order sustaining demurrers without leave to amend. Because that order is not appealable, and appellant failed to obtain an appealable judgment after he was notified to do so, Court dismiss the appeal.

Appellant Michael A. Kirkorian appeals from a judgment entered after a jury convicted him of one count of second degree murder (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a)) and found true the allegation that he personally used and intentionally discharged a firearm that caused great bodily injury and death (Pen. Code, 12022.53, subds. (b)-(d)). The trial court sentenced appellant to a term of 40 years to life in prison, consisting of 15 years to life for the murder, plus 25 years to life for the firearm enhancements. Court affirm.

Defendant Rodrick Deun Cole was convicted by jury on three counts of assault with a deadly weapon involving different victims (Pen. Code,[1] 245, subd. (a)(2)). The jury found as to all counts that defendant had personally used a firearm under section 12022.5, subdivision (a).[2]In a bifurcated proceeding, defendant waived his trial rights and admitted he had suffered 12 prior serious or violent felony convictions for robbery making him subject to sentencing under the Three Strikes law and section 667, subdivision (a)(1). Prior to sentencing on September 26, 2008, the court struck all but one of defendants prior strike convictions for robbery because they arose from one occasion. Rejecting defendants plea for imposition of a less severe sentence based on the fact his prior crimes were committed when he was a juvenile, and the victims behavior led to his criminal conduct, the court imposed an aggregate sentence of 35 years in state prison.

The jury found defendants Victor Ventura and Ivan Cabreraadmitted Barrio Mojados (BMS or Wet Town) gang membersguilty of the murder of Ricardo Lizarraga. Efrain F. was with Lizarraga when he was shot. There were no other witnesses to the crime. Efrain F. spoke with police detectives and defense investigators and testified at the preliminary hearing. Once trial began, however, the prosecution could not locate him, and the trial court deemed Efrain F. unavailable to testify. On appeal, both defendants argue the prosecution did not exercise due diligence in trying to locate Efrain F. for trial and, therefore, the court erred in permitting the use of Efrain F.s preliminary hearing testimony at trial. They also claim the court erred in denying their motions for new trial based on Efrain F.s reemergence after trial and willingness to testify. Finally, with respect to Efrain F., defendant Cabrera argues the court improperly restricted the jurys consideration of a defense investigators videotaped interview of Efrain F. Defendant Ventura also argues the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict against him. Court are not persuaded by defendants arguments and, therefore, affirm the judgments.

Plaintiff Seth Hoffberg appeals from an order vacating a default and default judgment entered against defendants Flintridge Builders, Inc. (Flintridge), a California Corporation, and its principal, Stephen M. Robertson (Robertson), sometimes collectively referred to as defendants. Court affirm.

Appellant Peter Paul Johnson appeals from his conviction of one count of felony resisting of an executive officer (Pen. Code, 69).[1] Appellants sentence was enhanced because of prior felony convictions and prison terms ( 1170.12, 667, 667.5). Appellant requests our review of the trial courts denial of appellants motion for pretrial discovery made after in camera review of personnel files from the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department. He argues that the trial court committed reversible error by failing to instruct the jury to consider misdemeanor resisting of a peace officer as a lesser included offense ( 148, subd. (a)). Appellant also argues that the jury instruction for felony resisting was flawed, and that the trial court gave an inadequate response to a jury question.
We find that the trial court erred in not instructing the jury to consider the lesser included offense, and reverse the judgment.

Helen Harris-Scott, representing herself, appeals from a judgment dismissing her action after the court sustained without leave to amend demurrers to the complaint by defendants, the City of Los Angeles and its police department (City) and the County of Los Angeles. Only the City has appeared in response to this appeal. We affirm the judgment, because appellant has not provided a record sufficient to permit determination of her appeal.

Appellant, Norman Garrett, was convicted of burglary his third strike after representing himself in a jury trial. He contends that the trial court erred in not inquiring into his mental competency to waive his right to counsel before granting his request to represent himself. Court conclude that appellant has failed to show substantial evidence of mental illness to compel the trial court to order a hearing, and Court affirm the judgment.

Stevie Lee Shaw appeals a judgment following conviction of second degree burglary. (Pen. Code, 459, 460.) Court affirm.

Following denial of his motion to suppress evidence Juan Arenas pleaded no contest to one count of possession of marijuana for purposes of sale. (Health & Saf. Code, 11359.) Court affirm.

Amber E. (Mother) and A.H. (Father) appeal from a dependency court order terminating their parental rights to their two-year-old daughter A., who was born with drugs in her bloodstream. Neither Mother nor Father made any substantial progress in completing the court-ordered case plan, which required random drug testing, domestic violence counseling, and parenting classes. None of these requirements was accomplished over a 16-month period. Substantial evidence supports the dependency courts termination of parental rights. Further, Father was not deprived of reasonable reunification services.

Gerardo H., a minor, appeals the order continuing him as a ward of the juvenile court and releasing him on probation with various terms and conditions (Welf. & Inst. Code, 602). He also appeals the order denying his motion to suppress statements he made to the police on the ground that they were involuntary.