CA Unpub Decisions

Richard Michael Elinski got into an argument with the manager of the complex where he rented a condominium. The manager called the police, who arrested Elinski for suspected drug use. Elinski sued the County of Ventura, Ventura County Sheriff's Department, Senior Deputy Julie Novak and Deputy Edward Beauvais for false arrest, assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy and violation of civil rights. The trial court granted summary judgment as to all defendants on all causes of action. On appeal, Elinksi makes numerous arguments concerning the summary judgment procedure and contends that his civil rights and state law tort claims were improperly decided on summary judgment. Court affirm.

Juan Carlos Dena was convicted of two counts of second degree murder (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a)), two counts of evading an officer causing death (Veh. Code, 2800.3, subd. (b)), one count of unlawful driving or taking of a vehicle (Veh. Code, 10851, subd. (a)), and one count of leaving the scene of an accident (Veh. Code, 20001, subd. (a)). His sole argument on appeal is that the trial court committed prejudicial error as to the two murder counts by instructing the jury with an impermissible mandatory presumption.
Court find no instructional error and affirm the judgment.

This case concerns the two children of appellant B.S. (father) and C.S. (mother): M.S., a boy born in 1991, and L.S., a girl born in 1994. Mother and the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (Department) have accused father of sexually abusing the children. Father denies this charge. An Illinois family law court has determined that father shall have sole custody of the children. In February 2006, we held in an unpublished opinion that the courts of Illinois, and not the courts of California, have subject matter jurisdiction to determine the issue of custody. We remanded the case to the superior court for proceedings to immediately effectuate transport of the children to the State of Illinois. Court affirm the courts order.

Ivan Martinez appeals from the judgment entered following his no contest plea to possession for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, 11351.5). The plea followed denial of appellants motion to suppress evidence pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5. The trial court suspended execution of sentence and placed appellant on three years formal probation. The judgment is affirmed.

Jerald Belvin (appellant) appeals from the order revoking probation after he had previously pled no contest to possessing cocaine base for the purposes of sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11351.5), with admissions that he had two prior convictions of an enumerated felony narcotics offense (Health & Saf. Code, 11370.2) and that he had served a separate prison term for a felony (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)). At his original sentencing, the trial court had imposed a four-year middle term in state prison and ordered execution of the term suspended upon the grant of three years of formal probation. After revocation of probation, the trial court imposed a four-year middle term of imprisonment. The order under review is affirmed.

Lawyers with an apparently weaker case attempted to intervene in an apparently stronger class action case. The trial court denied the motion to intervene and overruled objections to the proposed settlement. In the apparently stronger case, a class of uninsured patients sued Sutter Health, alleging that it improperly denied them the discounts it granted insured patients. After much pretrial skirmishing and massive discovery, a retired judge (Hon. Coleman Fannin) mediated a settlement representing nearly a complete victory for the plaintiffs, including attorney fees.
The orders denying intervention and approving the settlement are affirmed. Appellants shall pay respondents costs on appeal. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.278(a)(2).)

A jury found defendant John Earl Jones guilty of continuous sexual abuse of a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code,[1] 288.5 - count I), lewd act upon a child ( 288, subd. (a) - count II) and oral copulation of a person under the age of 18 ( 288a, subd. (b)(1) - count III). The court dismissed counts II and III, denied probation, and sentenced defendant to 16 years in state prison, ordering him to pay specified fees and fines, including restitution. Court accept the Peoples concession as to the latter two contentions, and shall otherwise affirm the judgment.

Donna Marie Saracino was charged with 14 theft-related counts. Pursuant to a negotiated settlement, she pleaded guilty to felony identity theft (Pen. Code, 530.5, subd. (a)) and felony theft ( 484e, subd. (d)). The remaining 12 counts were dismissed with a Harveywaiver. Sentenced to state prison for two years eight months, defendant appeals contending the trial court abused its discretion by not granting her probation. Court reject the claim.

After his girlfriend complained that he came home drunk and punched her, defendant Robert Lynn Alldredge entered a negotiated plea of no contest to one count of inflicting injury on a spouse or cohabitant (Pen. Code, 273.5, subd. (a)). The trial court suspended imposition of sentence, placed defendant on probation, and imposed various fines and fees. At issue on appeal is the courts imposition as a condition of probation a $50 chemical urinalysis fee pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.1ab. The $50 chemical urinalysis fee shall be stricken. As modified, the order of probation is affirmed. The court is directed to amend its records to reflect the modification and to forward the appropriate documents to appellant and the probation department.

Defendant Paul Noah Spohn pleaded no contest to a felony count of receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, 496, subd. (a)),[1]and he admitted a prior prison term. ( 667.5, subd. (b).)[2] The trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for a total of three years: the middle term of two years on the stolen property count and an additional year for the special allegation. The court also ordered defendant to pay $2,500 in public defender fees.
Defendant appeals following the trial courts issuance of a certificate of probable cause. He claims the trial court denied him his due process right to speak at sentencing, and it imposed attorney fees without providing a statutorily required hearing. He also asserts the abstract of judgment incorrectly states the day of sentencing and needs correction. We conclude defendant was not denied due process at sentencing. However, the trial court conducted an inadequate hearing on the attorney fee issue. Court remand to allow the trial court to conduct a proper hearing. Court also order the abstract of judgment to be corrected.

Defendant Charles Richard Palmer entered negotiated pleas of guilty to three counts of continuous child molestation. (Pen. Code, 288.5.) The trial court sentenced him to an aggregate prison term of 48 years and imposed various fines and fees.

Appellant C.A., the mother of minors A.A. and N.A., appeals from the juvenile courts order terminating parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, 366.26, 395.)[1] On appeal, she contends the Yolo County Department of Employment and Social Services (DESS) failed to comply with the notice provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act. (ICWA; 25 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.) Court affirm.

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

Nicole Kathleen Wilcox was convicted following a court trial of one count of arson (Pen. Code,[1] 451, subd. (b)). The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Wilcox on probation for three years, subject to treatment and restitution conditions. Wilcox appeals contending the trial court erred in allowing the case to proceed without a not guilty by reason of insanity plea, and in excluding evidence of mental disease or defect as a defense to the crime of arson. Court will reject both contentions and affirm.