CA Unpub Decisions

Wedbush Morgan Securities, Inc. (Wedbush Morgan), Wedbush, Inc. and its managing agents G. William Ott III, Edward Wedbush, Kevin Lunby and V. Thomas Hale appeal from an order denying their motion to compel arbitration of Thea Gellers complaint for sexual harassment and discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination and related employment claims. The trial court concluded the arbitration provision in untitled, single-page forms prepared by Wedbush Morgan and signed by Geller, which read, I also agree to submit to arbitration any and all disputes that may occur between Wedbush Morgan Securities, Inc. and me was unilateral, unconscionable and unenforceable. Court affirm.

Kendrick Daly appeals from the judgment entered upon his convictions by jury of attempted murder (Pen. Code, 664, 187, count 2),[1]three counts of assault with a firearm ( 245, subd. (a)(2), counts 3, 7 & 8), assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury ( 245, subd. (a)(1), count 5) and mayhem ( 203, count 6).[2] The jury found to be true as to count 2 the firearm allegations within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivisions (b), (c) and (d), as to counts 3, 7 and 8 the firearm allegation within the meaning of section 12022.5, subdivision (a), and as to counts 5, 6, and 8 the great bodily injury allegation within the meaning of section 12022.7, subdivision (c). The trial court sentenced appellant to state prison for an aggregate term of 14 years eight months plus 25 years to life. Appellant contends that there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction of assault with a firearm as alleged in count 3. court affirm.

Gary Smith, who had been hired by Peter F. Paul to produce the concert portion of a fundraising event Paul was organizing for former Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (Senator Clinton), appeals from the trial courts order denying his special motion to strike under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 a fraud claim filed by Paul alleging Smith had misrepresented the fee he would charge for his services. Court affirm.

Hugo Lara appeals from his conviction on one count of second degree robbery, with a gun use enhancement. He claims there is insufficient evidence of identity to support the conviction. He also claims the court erred in admitting the testimony of a police detective regarding a telephone conversation she overheard in which appellant said he would surprise the prosecutor with two witnesses, and in instructing the jury that it could consider appellants late disclosure of witnesses as evidence tending to show his consciousness of guilt. We find no error and affirm the judgment.

A jury found defendant Sterling Joseph Stryker guilty of being a past-convicted felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, 12021), and possession of a controlled substance while armed with a firearm (Health & Saf. Code, 11350, subd. (a); Pen. Code, 12022, subd. (a)(1)). The trial court found true an allegation that defendant had a prior felony conviction that qualified as a strike under Californias Three Strikes Law (Pen. Code, 1170.12.) After the trial denied court defendants motion to strike the prior conviction under People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 (Romero), it sentenced him to state prison for a total term of seven years.

Following a contested jurisdictional hearing, the County of Solano juvenile court sustained an allegation that minor James J. committed one count of felony robbery arising out of a purse-snatching. The court ordered him placed at Fouts Springs Youth Facility for a maximum time of confinement of eight years, seven months. On appeal, James challenges the jurisdictional and dispositional orders, contending there was insufficient evidence that he used enough force to support a robbery finding. Court disagree and affirm.

Defendant A.A. is the biological father of four-year-old D.J., a dependent child of the juvenile court. Defendant contends the order terminating his parental rights is invalid because the juvenile court failed to find that he was a presumed father within the meaning of Adoption of Kelsey S. (1992) 1 Cal.4th 816 (Kelsey S.). D.J.s mother, defendant T.J., whose parental rights were also terminated, joins in Fathers argument, but raises no contentions on her own behalf. We disagree with Father because the court properly found facts sufficient to disqualify him from Kelsey S. presumed father status. Accordingly, Court affirm.

Landowners sued to quiet title to an easement for a pipeline conveying water across a neighboring landowners property, and the right of access to that pipeline to conduct necessary repairs and maintenance. The trial court found the landowners had established both an express and a prescriptive easement over the neighbors property. Court shall affirm as to the prescriptive easement.

This appeal is from an interlocutory judgment following a bench trial in a partition action. Plaintiffs Shwu-Jen Lin and her husband, Hong-Chuan Lin, the appellants in this appeal, brought the action against Janes brother, Ing-Jieh Jeng. As did the parties at trial, we refer to plaintiff Shwu-Jen Lin as Jane, and to defendant Ing-Jieh Jeng as Jack.
In the partition complaint, Jane and her husband alleged that they owned an undivided 85 percent interest in a single family residence located at 1025 Geranio Drive in Alhambra, California, and that Jack owned an undivided 15 percent interest. Jane and her husband sought a partition by sale.

A jury convicted defendant Victor Manuel Meza of felony evading of a police officer (Veh. Code, 2800.2, subd. (a), count 1), assault on a peace officer with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, 245, subd. (c), count 5),[1] felony vandalism ( 594, subd. (a)), and two misdemeanors, hit and run driving (Veh. Code, 20002, subd. (a), count 4), and driving without a license (Veh. Code, 12500, subd. (a), count 11).[2] Following his admission of one prior strike allegation ( 667, subds. (b) (i), 1170.12, subds. (a) (d)), one prior serious felony conviction ( 667, subd. (a)), and two prior prison terms ( 667.5, subd. (b)), the court sentenced him to a total term of 17 years, 4 months. He appeals, contending: (1) the trial court erred in defining the term deadly weapon, requiring reversal of his conviction for assault on a peace officer with a deadly weapon in count 5; (2) the one-year terms imposed for each of his section 667.5, subdivision (b) priors must be vacated, because his admission of those enhancements was defective; (3) the trial court violated section 654 by imposing separate sentences on his convictions for felony evading, felony vandalism, and misdemeanor hit and run driving; and (4) imposition of the upper term on count 5 violated Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270, and Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296. Court affirm the judgment.

K.W. appeals in propria persona from the trial courts denial of ex parte relief. Court dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

The minor in this dependency case, Muhamed E.,[1] appeals from the juvenile courts dismissal of the dependency petition after the court found that Muhamed was not a child described under Welfare and Institutions Code[2] section 300. Muhamed contends the juvenile court erred by failing to exercise ongoing jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (the UCCJEA) because he had been abandoned by his parents and was abused by his father, who lived in Morocco. Because substantial evidence supports the juvenile courts finding, Court affirm the judgment.

Defendant, David Moreno, pleaded no contest to selling cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, 11352, subd. (a)) (count 2) following the denial of his evidence suppression motion. Imposition of sentence was suspended and defendant was placed on three years formal probation on the condition that he serve 180 days in the county jail. He received credit for two days in presentence custody. He was ordered to pay: a $200 restitution fine (Pen. Code, 1202.4, subd. (b)); a $200 probation revocation restitution fine (Pen. Code, 1202.44); and a $20 court security fee. (Pen. Code, 1465.8, subd. (a)(1).) Defendant was also ordered to pay a $50 laboratory analysis fee (Health & Saf. Code, 11372.5, subd. (a)) plus penalty assessments totaling $85 ($50 pursuant to Penal Code section 1464, subdivision (a)(1), and $35 under Government Code section 76000) together with a $20 [deoxyribonucleic acid] assessment; and a $30 court facilities assessment. (Gov. Code, 70373, subd. (a)(1).) Counts 1, 3 and 4 were dismissed in the interests of justice.

Jamie P. appeals the termination of his parental rights with respect to Armando P. Jaime P. contends he was Armandos presumed parent and, as such, had to be found unfit before his parental rights could be terminated. Court conclude the juvenile court made sufficient findings of Jaime P.s parental unfitness and affirm the order terminating parental rights.