CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant Zain Holmes appeals his conviction of two counts of forcible rape (Pen. Code, 261, subd. (a)(2)) with true findings that he bound the victim (Pen. Code, 667.61, subds. (a)-(d)). He contends the trial court erred in failing to read back to the jury defense counsels closing argument, thereby violating his right to effective assistance of counsel. Court affirm.

Erick Ramirez appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial in which he was convicted of attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon. He contends photographs of the victims injury should not have been admitted into evidence, he should have been granted a continuance to call a medical expert to discuss the photographs, the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions, and his assault sentence should be stayed because the assault conviction merges with the attempted murder conviction. Court affirm with directions.

Defendants, Vernon T. Johnson, Jonathan Moore, and Michael Franscula Bennett, appeal from their convictions arising from a gang related shooting. Mr. Johnson was convicted of: first degree murder (Pen. Code[1] 187, subd. (a)); two counts of attempted murder ( 187, subd. (a), 667); two counts of firearm assault ( 245, subd. (a)(2)); and shooting at an occupied motor vehicle. ( 246.) Special circumstances allegations were sustained as to Mr. Johnson. ( 190.2, subd. (a)(21)-(22).) Mr. Moore and Mr. Bennett were convicted of the same offenses except for the homicide and its related special allegations. The jury returned gang and multiple firearm use findings which we will discuss as they are pertinent. ( 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C); 12022.5, subd.(a); 12022.53, subds. (b)-(e)(1).)

Defendants, Vernon T. Johnson, Jonathan Moore, and Michael Franscula Bennett, appeal from their convictions arising from a gang related shooting. Mr. Johnson was convicted of: first degree murder (Pen. Code[1] 187, subd. (a)); two counts of attempted murder ( 187, subd. (a), 667); two counts of firearm assault ( 245, subd. (a)(2)); and shooting at an occupied motor vehicle. ( 246.) Special circumstances allegations were sustained as to Mr. Johnson. ( 190.2, subd. (a)(21)-(22).) Mr. Moore and Mr. Bennett were convicted of the same offenses except for the homicide and its related special allegations. The jury returned gang and multiple firearm use findings which we will discuss as they are pertinent. ( 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C); 12022.5, subd.(a); 12022.53, subds. (b)-(e)(1).)

Marc Smith and Krane & Smith, counsel for Elaine T. Yaffe, appeal from the trial courts award of $6,000 in monetary sanctions against them in connection with a third-party subpoena they issued to the accountant of Eddie Mendelsohn and San Diego Pallets, Inc. Court reverse the sanctions order.

David Jessen appeals from a postjudgment order awarding Mentor Corporation $11,617.88 in costs as the prevailing party in Jessens product liability action. Court affirm.

Bruce Duane Nelson appeals his conviction, by jury, of three counts of lewd acts on a dependent adult without the use of force or violence. (Pen. Code, 288, subd. (c)(2).)[1] Appellant pleaded no contest to four additional counts of the same offense after the jury was unable to reach a verdict as to those counts. At sentencing, the trial court imposed the upper term of three years on the principal count and additional consecutive terms of eight months (one third the midterm) for each of the remaining counts, for a total term in state prison of seven years. Appellant contends the trial court erred in instructing the jury in terms of CALCRIM 331concerning the credibility of a witness with a cognitive impairment, and in imposing the upper term on the principal count. Court affirm.

After a two-day crime spree involving multiple victims, a jury convicted Angel Hernandez (appellant) of nine counts of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, 211;[1] counts 1-3, 5, 9, 12, 16-18), two counts of attempted second degree robbery ( 664, 211; counts 4, 6), two counts of assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury ( 245, subd. (a)(1); counts 7, 11), and one count of assault with a firearm (245, subd. (a)(2); count 14). The jury also found true allegations that in counts 1 through 7, 12, 14, 17, and 18, appellant personally used a firearm in the underlying offenses, and in counts 3, 5 through 7, 12, and 18, that a principal was armed with a handgun. ( 12022.53, subd. (b); 12022, subd. (a)(2).) Appellant admitted that he suffered a prior conviction for a serious felony, which qualified as a strike under the Three Strikes Law. ( 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d).) The trial court sentenced appellant to 63 years in state prison.

A three-count information charged Bautista with the murder of Larina Webb (Pen. Code, 187),[1] the attempted willful, deliberate, and premeditated murder of Felipe Lopez ( 664, 187) and possession of ammunition by a felon ( 12316, subd. (b)(1)). A gang enhancement under section 186.22, subdivision (b)(1) was alleged with respect to all counts and firearm enhancements under section 12022.53, subdivisions (b), (c), (d), and (e) were alleged with respect to the murder and attempted murder. Bautista was tried by a jury. The prosecutions theory was that Bautista aided and abetted the murder and the attempted murder. No witness testified for the defense.

Devin Jerome Denmark (Denmark) and Lamond Travione McCoy (McCoy) were tried before a jury and convicted of second degree robbery in violation of Penal Code section 211.[1] Subsequently, the trial court found true the allegations that McCoy had suffered a prior conviction for which he served a prison term, and that the conviction qualified as a prior serious felony conviction and a prior strike. ( 667, subds. (a)-(i); 667.5, subd. (b); 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d).) Denmark and McCoy appeal their convictions on the following grounds: (1) the prosecutor violated their right to equal protection by exercising peremptory challenges based on racial discrimination; and (2) the trial court erred by failing to dismiss a juror[2]who could not sufficiently perform his duties. In addition, McCoy argues that the trial court violated section 1385 and People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 (Romero) when it refused to strike his 1998 conviction for robbing a federal credit union in violation of title 18 United States Code section 2113(a)-(d). Court find no error and affirm.

In this defamation case, Charles Lara appeals from an order denying his special motion to strike Trevor Dunne's complaint as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, section 425.16. Court affirm.

A.H. appeals the judgment (order declaring A.H. a ward of the juvenile court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602) based on the finding A.H. committed four counts of violating a gang injunction, a misdemeanor. (Pen. Code, 166, subd. (a)(4).) Court reject A.H.s claim of insufficiency of the evidence and affirm the judgment. Court order the minute order prepared after the disposition hearing corrected to omit reference to the maximum term of confinement.

Mauricio Eduardo Magana appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial that resulted in his conviction of second degree murder (Pen. Code 187, subd. (a)),[1]during which he discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury and death ( 12022.53, subd. (d)), and in his admissions to having suffered a prior serious felony conviction ( 667, subd. (a)) which also qualified as a strike under the three strikes law ( 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and to having served a prior prison term ( 667.5, subd. (b)). He was sentenced to prison on his murder conviction to life with a 30-year minimum term, or double the 15-year minimum for his strike, plus 25 years to life for the firearm and five years for the serious felony enhancements. The court also imposed a one-year prior prison enhancement to be served concurrently with the firearm enhancement. Appellant contends the trial court committed prejudicial error in refusing to instruct on voluntary manslaughter and in denying his petition for disclosure of juror identification information. No error was committed.

Defendant Calvin Choyce appeals from a final judgment convicting him of sexual offenses against women identified herein as Jane Does 1 through 4, and sentencing him to a term of 358 years to life. Defendant argues that reversal is necessary because the trial court committed prejudicial error regarding his motions about legal representation, its admission of certain evidence, and its instruction to the jury regarding flight. Defendant also argues that, should we find these purported errors were individually harmless, that their cumulative effect was prejudicial. Court affirm the judgment.