CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant and appellant Monique Antoinett Givens appeals from the judgment entered following a bench trial in which she was convicted of assault on a child causing death, second degree murder, and child abuse. Givens was sentenced to a prison term of 25 years to life.
Givens contends the evidence was insufficient to support her conviction for second degree murder. The People request that the abstract of judgment be corrected to conform to the trial courts oral pronouncement of judgment. Court correct the abstract as requested by the People. In all other respects, Court affirm.

After the trial court denied his motion to disclose a sealed affidavit in support of a search warrant (see People v. Hobbs (1994) 7 Cal.4th 948 (Hobbs)), Earnest Somerville agreed to plead no contest to one count of manufacturing cocaine base and one count of possession of a firearm by a felon, and admitted one prior strike conviction. In accord with his plea agreement, the trial court sentenced Somerville to state prison for a total term of 10 years. Court affirm.

Defendant Dominic D. Hunter appeals from the judgment of conviction of first degree murder (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a))[1]and assault with a deadly weapon with force likely to produce great bodily injury (ADW) ( 245, subd. (a)(1)). With regard to the murder conviction, he raises issues of evidentiary error, instructional error, and ineffective assistance of counsel. As for the ADW conviction, he contends the upper term was imposed in violation of Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270 (Cunningham). Court reject his contentions and affirm the judgment.

In a prior action to quiet title to residential real property and for breach of contract, appellant Gloria Powell obtained a default judgment against Augusta Carter. The default judgment decreed that The Ozzie A. Carter Family Living Trust (hereinafter, The Carter Trust) was the owner of the real property in question. Powell then had respondent Mercedes Gaitan and her family evicted from the property. Thereafter, Gaitan filed the present action and after a court trial obtained a judgment quieting title, granting injunctive relief, and awarding damages against Powell. The trial court found that the prior default judgment had been obtained by Powells outrageous conduct in making material misrepresentations and false statements . . . upon which the court relied regarding the legally required notice to Gaitan, and that Gaitan and her family had been wrongly evicted. The court deemed the prior default judgment null and void ab initio. Powell appeals and contends that Gaitans judgment against her is barred by the res judicata effect of the prior default judgment, and that Gaitans complaint for quiet title was not a proper remedy. Court find the contentions without merit and affirm.

Appellant, Beverly Warren, appeals the order denying her petition for probate of will and for letters testamentary of the estate of Warrens great aunt, Sally Mae Turner (the Decedent). On appeal, Warren claims insufficient evidence supported the trial courts denial of probate under Probate Code[1]section 8252. Specifically, Warren maintains that there is insufficient evidence to support the finding that she had not offered the complete and original will the Decedent allegedly executed in 2005 into probate. Alternatively, Warren claims that if she has not sustained the burden to reverse the incomplete will decision, the will should have nevertheless been admitted as a lost or destroyed will pursuant to section 8223. As explained herein, substantial evidence presented during the proceedings below supported the order denying probate of the will offered by Warren. Court affirm.

Defendant Sergio Moran appeals from the judgment entered following his conviction by jury of first degree murder with the finding that the murder was intentional and involved the infliction of torture. (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a), 190.2, subd. (a)(18).) He was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. At trial, the prosecution presented evidence of prior acts of violence committed by defendant against the victim, Fariba Vassei. He contends the admission of her statements to the police regarding those incidents violated his right to confrontation and requires reversal of his conviction. He also urges that he is entitled to credit for presentence custody time and the abstract of judgment incorrectly reflects the imposition of a parole revocation fine. Court agree he should be awarded custody credits and the parole revocation fine must be stricken. In all other respects, Court affirm the judgment.

A modification decision.

Defendant, Jose Navarro, appeals from his convictions for evading an officer with willful disregard for the safety of persons or property (Veh. Code, 2800.2) and unlawful taking of an automobile. (Veh. Code, 10851, subd. (a).) Defendant argues the trial court improperly denied a motion to compel disclosure of peace officer personnel records of Officer Rick Corpel. The Attorney General argues the trial court should have imposed two court security fees. Court affirm with modifications.

Jose Manuel Treto appeals from the judgment entered following his no contest plea to possession of a controlled substance while armed with a firearm. (Health & Saf. Code, 11370.1, subd. (a).) The trial court sentenced appellant to two years in state prison. Court affirm.

Sharon Irene Dutra appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial in which she was convicted of possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine, (Health & Saf. Code, 11377, subd. (a)) and a court trial in which she was found to have suffered a prior conviction for a serious or violent felony within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (Pen. Code, 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d) & 667, subds. (b)-(i)) and served a prior prison term within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b). Her motion to strike her prior conviction pursuant to People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 was denied and she was sentenced to prison for a total of four years, consisting of the middle term of two years, doubled by reason of her prior strike conviction. The sentence for the prior prison term was stayed. The judgment is affirmed.

In this dependency case, (Welf. & Inst. Code, 300 et seq.),[1]Patrick E., father of three dependent minor children (Father), appeals from a judgment of the juvenile court. He challenges the courts jurisdiction findings that he has a history of substance abuse, and that his current use of medical marijuana places the children at risk of harm. Father also contends that the trial court, in its disposition order, has presented him with an untenable choice of either giving up his legal use of medical marijuana or not reuniting with his children. We find that the record does not support any of Fathers contentions, and Court affirm the judgment from which he has appealed.

Plaintiff and appellant Doctors Associates, Inc. (DAI) appeals a judgment confirming an arbitration award in favor of defendant and respondent Sharanjit S. Nat (Nat). The essential issue presented is whether the arbitrator exceeded his powers so as to require vacation of the arbitration award. For the reasons set forth below, Court reject DAIs contentions and affirm the judgment.

The defendants, acting together with other gang members, went to the home of a person with whom one of the gang members had a conflict. Verbal aggression quickly turned to gunplay before the defendants fled. Convicted by jury of assault with a firearm, participation in a criminal street gang, and shooting at an inhabited dwelling, along with true findings of criminal street gang allegations, the defendants were sentenced to state prison. On appeal, they make numerous assertions challenging the judgment and sentencing. Court find that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the gang conviction and enhancements and therefore reverse the judgment as to that conviction and those enhancements. Otherwise, Court affirm.

This appeal involves corporal punishment and a private, nonsectarian schools request for certification from the California Department of Education (CDE) as a nonpublic, nonsectarian school (NPS). An NPS is defined as a private, nonsectarian school that enrolls individuals with exceptional needs pursuant to an individualized education program [IEP] and is certified by the [CDE]. (Educ. Code, 56034.) The Legislature has stated that the role of [an NPS] . . . shall be maintained . . . as an alternative special education service available to a local educational agency and parents. ( 56366.)
Accordingly, Court affirm the judgment that denied JRCs petition for writ of administrative mandate. (Code Civ. Proc., 1094.5.)