CA Unpub Decisions

This is an appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, Court affirm the judgment.

Following the reversal of his conviction for second degree murder (see People v. Bradford (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 1390), Matthew Ray Bradford entered negotiated guilty pleas to voluntary manslaughter (Pen. Code, 192, subd. (a)) and assault with a semi-automatic firearm ( 245, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced Bradford in accordance with the plea bargain: 11 years on the manslaughter count; 10 years for the personal use of a firearm; five years for the infliction of great bodily injury; two years on the assault count; and three years four months for the personal use of a firearm in connection with the assault count.
Bradford's request for a certificate of probable cause was denied.

L.J. and J.M. appeal orders terminating parental rights to their son, Emmanuel M., under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. L.J. also appeals an order denying his petition for modification under section 388, and J.M. appeals an order summarily denying her section 388 petition. Court affirm the orders.

Plaintiff JR Enterprises, LP appeals after summary judgment was granted in favor of Defendant City of Rancho Cucamonga (the City) in plaintiffs action for damages for inverse condemnation, taking and damaging of property, nuisance and dangerous condition of public property. Court affirm.

This action is an appeal from a wrongful death/personal injury lawsuit that resulted from a fatal rear-end collision on Interstate 40 (I-40) near Newberry Springs. On April 4, 1997, plaintiff Terry Blankenbaker and his wife Norma[1]were driving with their friends, plaintiffs Raymond Ed and Denise Shipley (the Shipleys), eastbound on I-40 between Barstow and Needles on their way to Laughlin. Blankenbaker came over a hill and noticed that the cars in front of him had their brake lights illuminated, a tractor-trailer had its flashers activated, and there was a flashing yellow light nearby (which was later determined to be an accident between a tour bus and a car). As Blankenbaker slowed to approximately five miles per hour and came up behind the tractor-trailer, his car was suddenly enveloped in a cloud of dust and sand. Blankenbaker pumped his brakes several times in order to warn drivers behind him.
At the same time, Ingram was driving behind Blankenbaker with her friend Janet Jarrett (Jarrett). They were on their way home after a whirlwind driving trip from Oklahoma to San Diego. Ingram never saw the lights that Blankenbaker observed. Suddenly Ingrams car entered the dust storm that had drifted across the road. She immediately impacted the car containing Blankenbaker, Norma, and the Shipleys. Norma was killed in the accident. Blankenbaker, the Shipleys, Ingram, and Jarrett all suffered injuries.

Appellants B.S. (mother) and S.D. (father) are the parents of S.S. and S.D. (the children). Their parental rights were terminated and they now contend the juvenile court erred in failing to apply the beneficial relationship exception to the termination of parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i).) Court affirm.

Following a probation revocation hearing, the trial court found true that defendant Manuel Cadena had violated the terms of his probation when he had tested positive for marijuana use. The trial court thereafter terminated defendants probation and imposed the previously suspended sentence of five years. Defendant appeals from the judgment, essentially challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. Court reject his contentions and affirm the judgment.

A modification decision.

A jury convicted appellant William Hale Hoard III of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, 211, 212.5, subd. (c); count 1), a felony, and resisting, delaying or obstructing a peace officer (Pen. Code, 148, subd. (a)(1), count 2), a misdemeanor. The jury also found true enhancement allegations that appellant personally used a deadly or dangerous weapon in committing the count 1 offense (Pen. Code, 12022, subd. (b)(1)) and that he had served a prison term for a prior felony conviction (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)). The court imposed a prison term of five years, consisting of the three-year midterm on count 1 plus one year on each of the two enhancements. On count 2, the court imposed a concurrent 90-day term in county jail. On appeal, appellants sole contention is that the prosecutor engaged in prejudicial misconduct in violation of Griffin v. California (1965) 380 U.S. 609 (Griffin), by commenting on appellants failure to testify at trial. Court will affirm.

Our authority in this appeal is limited to considering a single issue: Did Johnson properly serve the defendants with her summons and complaint? Because of the limited scope of this appeal, our decision does not address questions regarding the merits of her claims against her former attorneys, the attorney referral service, or her prior landlords. We conclude that Johnson failed to demonstrate she properly served the defendants with her summons and complaint. Accordingly, Court affirm the order granting the motion to quash.

A jury convicted appellant Antwoine Bealer of battery by a prisoner on a non-confined person (Pen. Code, 4501.5), and found true allegations that appellant had suffered three strikes.[1]The court imposed a prison term of 25 years to life, and ordered that term to run consecutively to the term appellant was serving at the time of the instant offense. On appeal, appellant contends he was denied a meaningful opportunity to prepare his defense, in violation of his right to self-representation under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Court affirm.

The juvenile court denied reunification services to C.S. (mother) after removing two of her children, D.M. and A.M. On appeal, mother contends (1) the courts determination that she had not made reasonable efforts to address the problems that led to the removal of another child was not supported by substantial evidence and (2) even if mother failed to make reasonable efforts, the court abused its discretion when it denied services without determining whether reunification would be in the best interest of the children. Court affirm.

The trial court sentenced defendant Joel Alonzo Bennett to 21 years in state prison after he entered a guilty plea to one count of robbery and admitted suffering prior serious or violent felony convictions. Before entering the plea defendant had unsuccessfully moved to suppress evidence pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5. Defendant appeals, contending the trial court erred by denying his suppression motion because the police conducted a warrantless search of his car without probable cause to do so. He argues in the alternative that since the vehicle search did not result in the seizure of any evidence relevant to the current robbery, we should nullify the trial courts suppression ruling because, otherwise, he will be foreclosed from having appellate review of the issue. Court reject defendants arguments and affirm the trial courts ruling.

Petitioner Rodney James Alcala contends he was denied his constitutional right to represent himself when the trial court denied his motion under the United States Supreme Court decision in Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806. The Orange County and Los Angeles County District Attorney Offices were invited to file an informal response to the petition for a writ of prohibition/mandate and the Orange County District Attorney advises this court that based on Alcalas reaffirmation of the Faretta waivers and his representation that he would not seek a continuance, the petition should be granted. Court agree and the petition is granted.