CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant Mark Lucky Edwards appeals from his conviction after jury trial below for evading a police officer causing serious injury and for driving under the influence causing injury, the latter also including enhancement findings that he caused great bodily injury to two different individuals. Defendant argues that his constitutional rights to due process and against double jeopardy were violated, and seeks reversal of conviction and sentence. Court affirm his conviction and sentence.

Codefendants Eric Scott and Johnny Key appeal the judgments and sentences imposed after a jury convicted them of murder and rape, respectively. Defendant Scott contends that his conviction for the murder of Isaac Joseph should be reversed because (1) there was insufficient corroboration of accomplice testimony; and, (2) the trial court committed instructional error in connection with CALCRIM jury instructions 362 and 337. Defendant Key contends that his conviction for the rape of Alondra Goodwin should be reversed because the trial court failed to instruct the jury to acquit on the rape charge if defendant reasonably believed Goodwin consented to sexual intercourse. Having considered each defendants contentions, Court affirm the judgments.

Joseph W. Pheffer appeals from an order requiring him to pay $10,000 in attorney fees to Julie Adamson in a child custody proceeding. Court affirm the order.

Steven Marlowe appeals from an order denying his petition for writ of mandate to set aside the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) order suspending his license. Marlowe contends he did not refuse to consent to a chemical test. (Veh. Code, 13353.) Court affirm.

Timothy Hans Freeman appeals from a judgment entered after he pleaded no contest to forcible sexual intercourse with a child who is 10 years of age or younger, (Pen. Code, 288.7, subd. (a))[1] and aggravated sexual assault of a child under the age of 14 ( 269, subd. (a)(1)). He contends (1) the sentence imposed on one of his counts should have been stayed, (2) the court imposed an incorrect sentence on one of his counts, and (3) the court erred when it imposed a $30 fine. Court conclude appellants first two arguments are meritorious and order the appropriate modifications. In all other respects, Court affirm.

In this marital dissolution action, the wife attempted to serve the husband with the dissolution petition in China without complying with the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, Nov. 15, 1965, 20 U.S.T. 361, T.I.A.S. No. 6638 (Hague Service Convention). The family court denied the husbands motion to quash service and, when he did not respond to the petition, entered a default judgment against him. Court reverse.

The juvenile court found that Jesse M. (appellant) committed second degree robbery and declared him a ward of the court. Appellants counsel has briefed no issue on appeal and asks this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellant has not filed a supplementary brief. Court find no arguable issues and affirm.

Prospero Araiza appeals from a final judgment entered after the denial of a motion to withdraw his plea of guilty to grand theft. 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.

In this action for fraudulent transfer (Civ. Code, 3439.04), the City alleged that Lloyd Conway and George Piedra fraudulently transferred the assets of Titan Capital dba Valley Cab to themselves, in order to avoid liability to the City in an action entitled City of Los Angeles v. Hernan Garcia. The City prevailed after court trial. Court reverse.

In May 2004 Charity McCrary entered into a written agreement with Slade Lohman for the sale of residential property. McCrary agreed to deliver the property vacant by close of escrow on July 15, 2004. She was unable to fulfill this obligation because tenants residing on the property successfully resisted eviction for almost four years, until February 2008. In September 2004, McCrary entered into an agreement with JC Ephraim in which he gave her a loan secured by the property. In September 2005, more than a year after escrow was to have closed but long before McCrary could perform her obligation to deliver the property vacant, McCrary deeded the property to Ephraim in lieu of his foreclosure on the loan.
Ephraim appeals, contending he did not interfere with Lohmans contractual relations or prospective economic advantage. Court affirm as to the cause of action for interference with contract and reverse as to the causes of action for intentional and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage.

A jury found appellant Corey D. McDaniel (McDaniel or Meeklo) guilty of the following: attempted murder of Jorge Santana (Santana or Stroller) in violation of Penal Code,[1]sections 664 and 187, subdivision (a) (count 1); shooting at an occupied motor vehicle ( 246) (count 2); and possession of a firearm by a felon ( 12021, subd. (a)(1)) (count 3). On counts 1 and 2, the jury found true the allegations that the attempted murder was committed willfully, deliberately, and with premeditation within the meaning of section 664, subdivision (a). The jury further found true the allegation that in committing the offense, McDaniel personally and intentionally discharged a handgun which proximately caused great bodily injury to the victim within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (d). The jury also found true the allegation that McDaniel personally and intentionally discharged a handgun within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (c) and found McDaniel personally used a handgun within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (b). Finally, on all three counts, the jury found true the allegation that the offenses were committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang ( 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(c)).

Denson Henderson was convicted of several counts of robbery, kidnapping, and forcible sex crimes. In this appeal, he claims he was denied his right to a fair trial based on the prosecutions failure to disclose material evidence. He also asserts sentencing error. Court affirm.

A jury convicted defendant and appellant Sarin Thoeur of first degree murder (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a)[1]; count 1); three counts of willful, deliberate, and premeditated attempted murder ( 664/187, subd. (a); counts 2, 5, and 6); shooting at an occupied motor vehicle ( 246; count 3); and assault with a firearm ( 245, subd. (a)(2); count 4). The jury found true the special allegations that defendant committed each of the offenses for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a criminal street gang with the specific intent to promote, further or assist in criminal conduct by gang members ( 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)); personally and intentionally discharged a firearm, a handgun, proximately causing great bodily injury in the commission of counts 1, 2, 5, and 6 ( 12022.53, subd. (d)); and personally used a firearm in the commission of count 4 ( 12022.5, subd. (a)). The trial court sentenced defendant to 185 years to life in state prison.

Appellant Manuel Jesse Felix, Jr. appeals from his conviction of one count of murder in the second degree (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a)). Appellant argues that the trial courts admission of evidence of prior bad acts was reversible error violating Evidence Code sections 1101, 1109, and 352,[1]and was inadmissible hearsay. He also contends the trial court committed reversible error by denying his motion to admit evidence that he claims was relevant to show his state of mind. Finding no prejudicial error, Court affirm the judgment.