CA Unpub Decisions

Appellant Ondray Demont Johnson entered a guilty plea to one count of false personation. The trial court initially sentenced him to probation, on condition he serve a term in county jail, and imposed fines. While appellant was serving his jail term, he committed new crimes and was convicted in a separate case. At sentencing, the trial court resentenced appellant in the instant case and imposed fines. On appeal, appellant contends (1) the trial court erroneously applied a surcharge and penalty assessment to the restitution fine imposed during the initial sentencing hearing; and (2) the trial court erroneously converted previously imposed fines and fees to a civil money judgment during resentencing. Court shall affirm the conviction and vacate the money judgment.

During a search of appellant Richard Joaquin Sanchezs residence, police officers seized two baggies containing suspected methamphetamine, a gram scale, some empty sandwich bags and approximately $17,000 from various locations in the master bedroom. One of the baggies weighed approximately 15 grams and the other weighed approximately 32 grams. At the preliminary hearing, it was stipulated that both of the baggies contained a usable amount of methamphetamine and Kern County Deputy Sheriff Robert Stevenson opined that the methamphetamine was possessed for purpose of sale.

Appellant Todd R. Tatro (Todd), a co-trustee of the Rodack Trust Indenture dated December 6, 1995, brings this appeal from a probate court order determining that a proposed petition brought by respondent Betty Jo Tatro (Betty Jo) does not violate a no contest clause. (Prob. Code, 21320.)[1] Todd claims the proposed petition to declare the trust revocable, approve modification of the trust, or terminate the trust and for an order to remove him as trustee violated the trusts no contest provision. As a result, he argues the probate court erred in ruling that the petition was protected by the safe harbor provisions of section 21305, subdivision (b)(7). Court affirm the finding the petition to modify the trust did not violate its no contest provisions.

Appellant Todd R. Tatro (Todd), a co-trustee of the M.H.R. Trust Indenture dated December 6, 1995, brings this appeal from a probate court order determining that a proposed petition brought by respondent Betty Jo Tatro (Betty Jo) does not violate a no contest clause. (Prob. Code, 21320.)[1] Todd claims the proposed petition to declare the trust revocable, approve modification of the trust, or terminate the trust and for an order to remove him as trustee violated the trusts no contest provision. As a result, he argues the probate court erred in ruling that the petition was protected by the safe harbor provisions of section 21305, subdivision (b)(7). Court affirm the finding the petition to modify the trust did not violate its no contest provisions.

Appellant Gustavo Cibrian was charged with assaulting and molesting A.J. and L.J. He entered into a negotiated plea agreement and, in exchange for a sentence of 13 years and four months, pled no contest to one count of violating Penal Code section 288, subdivision (b),[1]two counts of violating section 288, subdivision (c)(1), one count of violating section 647.6, subdivision (a), and one count of violating section 459. He was sentenced to the agreed upon term of imprisonment. During the courts oral pronouncement of sentence, it prohibited appellant from visiting any child under the age of 18 (the no contact order). The minute order of the sentencing hearing provides that appellant is prohibited from visiting any child victim or victims under 18 years of age.
The judgment is modified to prohibit all visitation between appellant and the child victims, A.J. and L.J., in conformity with section 1202.05. The no-contact order is stricken. As modified, the judgment is affirmed. The clerk of the superior court is directed to prepare an amended abstract of judgment reflecting this modification and to send a certified copy of the amended abstract to the Department of Corrections.

Appellant, T. D., appeals from an order of the juvenile court denying her request for reunification services as to her son D.V. after the juvenile court denied those services on December 18, 2007, pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 361.5, subdivision (b)(13). Appellant also contends the court abused its discretion in not making a finding pursuant to section 361.5, subdivision (c). Respondent contends these issues were resolved against appellant in case No. F054419, a writ proceeding, as to another sibling. Respondent argues the doctrines of res judicata and law of the case should be applied to the issues raised in the instant appeal. The judgment is affirmed.

Kirk D. Robinson appeals the judgment of the trial court denying him relief in his quiet title action against his aunt, Shann Elyse Chastain. Robinson challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the trial courts judgment granting title in her mothers home to Chastain by adverse possession. Because substantial evidence supports the judgment, Court affirm.

Mani Subramanian appeals from an order denying his motion to vacate dismissal. Court conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion and affirm the order.

Defendants Max Group Corporation (Max) and Moses Hall appeal from the trial courts judgment in favor of plaintiff Law Offices of Ann Koo (Koo). Max and Hall challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support the courts finding that they were liable for conversion, claim that a documentary exhibit was inadmissible, and contest the courts assessment of damages. Koo also appeals from the judgment and contends that the trial court should have ruled in its favor on Koos fraudulent transfer causes of action. Court reject all of these contentions and affirm the judgment.

In 1989, inmate Thomas Jeffery was convicted of second degree murder and sentenced to prison for 17 years to life. At Jefferys initial parole hearing in 1999 the Board of Prison Terms (Board) refused to set a parole date for him, concluding that he was unsuitable for release. On May 25, 2005, the Board conducted the first subsequent parole hearing and again decided that Jeffery was not suitable for parole.
Having independently examined the record before the superior court, we reject the courts finding that the presiding commissioner was actually prejudiced against Jeffery but we agree that the Boards reasons for denying parole are not supported by some evidence. Court also conclude that the superior courts order impermissibly limits the Boards discretion on remand. Accordingly, Court shall modify the order and, as modified, affirm.

Plaintiffs Heng Sao, Thoang Vann, Ne Chim, Lestly Sip, and Emily Sip appeal from an order denying their motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473 to vacate dismissal of their action against defendants Jason C. Clifton, Martin S. Fregoso, and Verna Fregoso. Court conclude that the trial court erred and reverse the order.

Defendant Craig Steven Lopez pleaded guilty to continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14 (Pen. Code, 288.5, subd. (a)), lewd conduct on a child under 14 by force or fear (Pen. Code, 288, subd. (b)(1)), oral copulation by force or fear (Penal Code, 288a, subd. (c)(2)), and rape by force or fear (Pen. Code, 261, subd. (a)(2)). Defendant also admitted that he suffered two prior strike convictions (Pen. Code, 667, subds. (b)‑(i), 1170.12). After the trial court denied defendants motion to dismiss the prior strike convictions pursuant to People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497, it sentenced defendant to state prison for an indeterminate term of 75 years to life consecutive to a determinate term of 36 years. This court granted defendants motion to file a late notice of appeal. The judgment is affirmed.

On May 30, 2007, Savoy received advice of and waived his constitutional rights, and pleaded nolo contendere to possession of methamphetamine. (Health & Saf. Code, 11377, subd. (a).) The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and granted Savoy 36 months' probation pursuant to the drug treatment program of Penal Code section 1210.1 ("Proposition 36"). On February 6, 2008, the trial court found Savoy in violation of probation. Savoy admitted that he did not attend a drug treatment program as directed, that he tested positive for drug use, and that he violated the terms and conditions of probation. The trial court imposed a low term sentence of 16 months' imprisonment, imposed fees and fines, and awarded Savoy 99 days' presentence custody credits. Savoy requested a certificate of probable cause to challenge his nolo contendere plea. The trial court denied the certificate.
The judgment is affirmed.

Ross B. in propria persona filed a petition for extraordinary writ review to challenge the juvenile courts order setting a hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. He opposes the courts order denying him reunification services. Because Ross is the biological father of two year old Z.P., he was not entitled to services. Court deny the writ.