CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant, Jose Guerra, appeals from his conviction, after a jury trial, of one count of first degree murder. (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a).) (All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted.) The jury found defendant personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing death to the victim. ( 12022.53, subd. (d).) He was sentenced to two consecutive terms of 25 years to life. Additionally, the trial court ordered defendant to: provide deoxyribonucleic acid and blood samples ( 296); pay a $200 restitution fine ( 1202.4, subd. (b)) and a $200 parole revocation restitution fine ( 1202.45); pay $7,467 plus 10 percent interest to the victim restitution fund; and pay $1,200 to the victims mother. The trial court awarded a total presentence custody credit of 708 days. The judgment is modified to impose a $20 court security fee. The abstract of judgment is to be corrected to accurately reflect the restitution orders as specified in the body of the opinion. The clerk is to forward an amended abstract of judgment to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The judgment is affirmed in all other respects.

A. A. is the mother of two daughters: F.R.A. (age 5) and R.A. (age 2). She appeals from the judgment terminating her parental rights to the children. (Welf. & Inst. Code, 366.26.) Appellant contends: (1) the adoption assessment report was deficient because it failed to substantially comply with the requirements of section 366.21, subdivision (i); and (2) the evidence is insufficient to support the juvenile court's finding that the children are likely to be adopted within a reasonable time. Court affirm.

In June 2006, a police officer stopped defendant Roy LaVann Coleman for a traffic violation. During a routine warrant check, the officer learned defendant had an outstanding felony warrant. At the officers request, defendant exited the car, but not after some delay and a lot of movement within the car. After exiting the car, the officer noted defendants speech had changed and he seemed to be holding something inside his cheek, which he attempted to swallow and refused to spit out. The judgment is affirmed.

A jury convicted defendant Deurika S. Seabrooks of grand theft by an agent, servant or employee. (Pen. Code, 487, subd. (b)(3).) The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on five years probation, ordered that she serve 240 days in custody with a work furlough recommendation, imposed various fines and fees, and awarded one day of custody credit.

In this marital dissolution appeal that focuses on child custody, the father claims that three related orders in the trial courts judgment that neither parent take the minor child out of the United States, that neither parent obtain a passport for the child or add the child to their passport, and that the childs United States and Persian passports be lodged with the court were not properly made under Family Code section 3048 and are unconstitutional. Court conclude that, because this matter was tried without a reporters transcript (a judgment roll appeal), the judgment must be affirmed.

A jury convicted defendant William[1]Thomas Coats of corporal injury of a cohabitant (Pen. Code, 273.5, subd. (a) count one),[2]criminal threats ( 422 count two), and false imprisonment ( 236 count three).[3] In a bifurcated proceeding, the jury found that defendant had three prior robbery convictions that were serious felonies ( 667, subd. (a)) as well as strikes ( 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12). Defendants Romero[4]motion to strike two of the three prior convictions for sentencing purposes was denied. He was sentenced to state prison on count two for 25 years to life plus 15 years for the prior robbery convictions. Sentence on counts one and three was stayed pursuant to section 654.
On appeal, defendant contends the evidence on counts one and two was insufficient and the evidence on count three showed only an attempt rather than a completed offense. He claims the denial of his Romero motion was an abuse of discretion, and his sentence violates the state and federal proscriptions of cruel and unusual punishment. Court affirm the judgment.

Appellant, the father of M.M., appeals from the juvenile courts order terminating his parental rights.[1] (Welf. & Inst. Code, 366.26, 395.)[2] Appellant claims the court erred by denying him reunification services at the dispositional hearing and by denying him visitation prior to the termination of parental rights. Court affirm.

Jamar Lee Hendrix was convicted following a jury trial of possession of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, 11350, subd. (a)). The court found Hendrix had suffered a prison prior conviction (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)). Hendrix filed a motion for discovery of police officer records under Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531, and the court granted an in camera review of such records. The trial court did not find any discoverable records in the materials presented by the custodian of records for the police agency. Hendrix appeals and requests this court to review the sealed materials to determine if there are any discoverable materials in the police files. Court have reviewed the sealed records and find no discoverable materials in such records.

A jury convicted Martin Isodoro Castro of failing to register as a sex offender (Pen. Code, 290, subd. (g)(2)). Castro was thereafter granted formal probation. Castro appeals contending the court admitted his statement to police in violation of the protection guaranteed by Mirandav. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436. Castro further contends the evidence at trial was not sufficient to support his conviction for failing to register as a sex offender. Court reject both contentions and affirm.

A jury found Eddie James Adair, Jr., guilty of willfully and unlawfully inflicting corporal injury, resulting in a traumatic condition, upon his spouse (Pen. Code, 273.5, subd. (a))[1]and arson ( 451, subd. (d)). Adair waived his right to a jury trial on allegations of a strike ( 667, subds. (b)-(i)), a serious felony prior conviction ( 667, subd. (a)(1)) and a prior prison term ( 667.5, subd. (b)). The court found the allegations. The judgment is modified by striking the one-year enhancement for the prior prison term. As so modified, the judgment is affirmed. The superior court is directed to prepare an amended abstract of judgment and to forward it to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

D.C., mother of dependent minors Francisco C. and Anthony C. (together, the minors) appeals a juvenile court order terminating reunification services at a 12-month permanency hearing. D.C. contends that the evidence showed there was a substantial probability that the minors would be returned to her custody by the 18 month date, and thus, that the court erroneously terminated reunification services. Court affirm the order.

Samuel B. and K.P. appeal the findings and orders entered at the termination of parental rights hearing held pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. Citing In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, they ask this court to exercise its discretion to review the record for error.
In In re Sade C., the California Supreme Court held review pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 is unavailable in "an indigent parent's appeal from a judgment or order, obtained by the state, adversely affecting his [or her] custody of a child or his [or her] status as the child's parent." (In re Sade C., supra, 13 Cal.4th at p. 959.) Court therefore deny their requests to review the record for error and to address their Anders issue. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738.). The appeals are dismissed.

Joanna B. appeals the findings and orders entered at the termination of parental rights hearing held pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. Citing In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, she asks this court to exercise its discretion to review the record for error.
In In re Sade C., the California Supreme Court held review pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 is unavailable in "an indigent parent's appeal from a judgment or order, obtained by the state, adversely affecting [her] custody of a child or [her] status as the child's parent." (In re Sade C., supra, 13 Cal.4th at p. 959.) Court therefore deny her requests to review the record for error and to address her Anders issues. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738.)

A jury convicted defendant of second degree murder (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a)) and elder abuse ( 368, subd. (b)(1)). She was sentenced to prison for 15 years to life and appeals claiming the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdicts and jury instruction error occurred. Court reject her contentions and affirm. The facts concerning these crimes will be described as part of our discussion of the sufficiency of the evidence.