CA Unpub Decisions

Patrick S. appeals a judgment terminating his parental rights to his minor daughter, Kiley S., on the basis of abandonment under Family Code section 7822. Patrick contends he did not "leave" Kiley in the care and custody of another person with the intent to abandon her, but instead, Kiley's mother N.B. prevented him from having contact with his daughter. Court affirm the judgment.

A felony complaint charged defendant and appellant with one count of being a gang member in possession of a loaded firearm (Pen. Code, 12031, subds. (a)(1) & (a)(2)(C)), and one count of possession of marijuana for sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11359). It was further alleged that both counts were committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang within the meaning of Penal Code section 186.22, subdivision (b)(1)(A).
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal challenging the sentence or matters occurring after the plea.

Defendant Michael David Nash was convicted of assault on a peace officer with a deadly weapon and battery on a peace officer causing injury. On appeal defendant claims (1) the trial court erred by failing to instruct on unanimity and (2) the evidence was insufficient to support the battery conviction. Court affirm.

A jury convicted defendant Gabriel Zarate of three counts of rape of a child under age 14 and more than 10 years younger than defendant (Pen. Code, 269, subd. (a)(1), 261, subd. (a)(2); all further statutory references are to this code), three counts of sodomy of a child under age 14 and more than 10 years younger than defendant ( 269, subd. (a)(3), 286, subd. (c)(2)), and one count of oral copulation on a child under age 14 and more than 10 years younger than defendant ( 269, subd. (a)(4), subd. 288a (c)(2).) The court sentenced him to 5 consecutive terms of 15 years to life for the 3 rape charges, 1 of the sodomy charges, and the oral copulation charge, and to 2 concurrent terms of 15 years to life for the remaining sodomy charges. Defendant was also ordered to pay $200 fines for restitution ( 1202.4, subd. (b)), parole revocation (suspended) ( 1202.45), and as a sex offender, the latter of which also included penalty assessments, and a $140 court security fee. ( 1465.8.) He was awarded 717 days of actual time credit and 108 days for good conduct. Court examined the record to determine if any arguable issues were present and found none. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pp. 441-442; People v. Johnson (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 106, 111-112.) The judgment is affirmed.

Defendant Jereme Gromer was found guilty by jury trial of felony corporal injury to a child (Pen. Code, 273d, subd. (a)count 1)[1] and felony child abuse ( 273a, subd. (a)count 2) in connection with injuries inflicted on his 15-day-old son. The jury also found as to both counts that defendant had personally inflicted great bodily injury within the meaning of section 12022.7, subdivision (d). On appeal, defendant claims that (1) the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment rights by imposing the upper term for both the substantive offense and the enhancement, (2) the court also failed to properly exercise its discretion in imposing the upper term, (3) the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct during rebuttal argument, and (4) defendant was deprived of effective assistance of counsel when his trial attorney failed to properly object to the prosecutors misconduct. Court affirm the judgment.

A mobilehome park owner increased the rent of the homeowners in the park to recoup the costs of capital expenditures. An arbitration proceeding under the citys mobilehome rent control ordinance resulted in a settlement, which was confirmed by an arbitrator. Two years later, a dispute arose over the meaning of that settlement. The dispute was submitted to arbitration, but the park owner did not comply with the arbitrators decision. The homeowners in the park then filed this lawsuit, which led to a decision of this court in an interlocutory appeal and an ultimate settlement of the action. Consistent with the terms of the settlement, both sides applied for attorney fees. The trial court granted attorney fees to the homeowners pursuant to a fee shifting provision in the rent control ordinance and the private attorney general statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5. The court denied the park owners application for fees under the ordinance. Court affirm.

Jerome Houston appeals from a judgment entered after a jury convicted him of attempted murder (Pen. Code,[1] 187, 664), assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury ( 245, subd. (a)(1)), first degree robbery ( 212.5, subd. (a)), and first degree burglary ( 459, 460, subd. (a)). He contends (1) the court abused its discretion when it struck the testimony of a witness, (2) the court erred when it allowed the prosecutor to present rebuttal evidence, (3) the court abused its discretion when it limited his counsels closing argument, (4) the court erred when it declined to strike a strike finding, and (5) the court sentenced him incorrectly. Court conclude the trial court did not commit any prejudicial errors and will affirm the judgment.

Court uphold a probate courts conclusion that an assisted signing validly created a power of attorney under Probate Code section 4121, thus rendering a later transfer of title pursuant to that power valid.

Defendant appeals from a judgment entered on his plea. His counsel has asked this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant entered a plea of no contest to one count of felony possession of child pornography (Pen. Code, 311.11, subd. (a)),[1]and was sentenced to the mitigated term of 16 months in state prison. The charges against defendant arose from his possession of a collection of images of young girls. Defendant used a laptop computer issued to him during the course of his employment with the County of San Mateo to download thousands of sexually explicit images of young girls. During a search of his home, some 75 compact discs containing thousands of images depicting the genitalia of prepubescent females, and numerous photographs and videos of young girls (some under the age of 10), engaged in sexual activity with adult males and with other children, were located.
The judgment is affirmed.

J.H. (Mother) has filed a petition for extraordinary writ seeking review of the juvenile courts order setting a permanency planning hearing for her son, R.H. (Minor), under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26.[1] Mother challenges (1) the juvenile courts decision to appoint a guardian ad litem for her in the proceedings below and (2) the courts denial of reunification services to her. Finding no error in either decision, Court deny the petition.

Defendant Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) appeals from the judgment entered after a jury found that LAUSD failed to engage in a timely, good faith interactive process with plaintiff Robert Schermerhorn, an LAUSD employee with a physical disability, as required by Government Code section 12940, subdivision (n). LAUSD also appeals from the trial courts orders denying LAUSDs motions for a new trial, for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and to reduce the award of attorneys fees to Schemerhorn. Court affirm.

Defendant and appellant Harold Tassin (defendant) fired a handgun from the sidewalk at the victim who was standing on the porch of a relatives house, striking the victim in both feet. As he fled the scene, he pointed his gun at pursuing police who returned fire, wounding defendant in the knee. On appeal, defendant raises multiple challenges to his conviction and his sentence. Court hold that defendant forfeited certain of his contentions on appeal and reject the remainder of his contentions. Court therefore affirm the judgment.

Defendant and appellant Jovan Taylor (defendant) pleaded no contest to one count of possession of marijuana for sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11359) and was placed on formal probation for three years on various terms and conditions. Following several revocations and reinstatements of probation, defendants probation ultimately was revoked and terminated and the trial court sentenced defendant to the upper term of three years in state prison. On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in selecting the upper term because that selection was based on events that occurred after the initial grant of probation. Defendant also contends that the trial courts selection of the upper term violated Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270 (Cunningham) because it was based on facts not admitted by defendant or found by a jury. Court reverse defendants upper term sentence and remand to the trial court for resentencing because the trial court based defendants sentence impermissibly on events that occurred after the initial grant of probation and any reinstatement of that probation.

The Los Angeles Unified School District Personnel Commission (the Commission) appeals from the judgment granting the petition for writ of administrative mandate filed by petitioner Holmgeir Brynjolfsson. We reverse, and remand to the trial court with directions to issue a writ of mandate directing the Commission to vacate its decision of April 12, 2006, and to make whatever findings it deems appropriate based on the administrative record prior to issuing a new decision. The judgment of the trial court is reversed. The matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to issue a writ of mandate directing the Commission to vacate its decision of April 12, 2006, and to make whatever findings it deems appropriate based on the administrative record prior to issuing a new decision. Each side shall bear its own costs on appeal.