CA Unpub Decisions

A jury convicted appellant of robbing and assaulting victims. It also found appellant used a knife when robbing. Appellant challenges (1) his convictions for robbery and assault; (2) the trial court's failure to stay the weapons enhancement appended to the robbery conviction; and (3) the order for payment of restitution to victim. Appellant also contends, and the People agree, that the trial court erroneously imposed a term of imprisonment for an enhancement that was found not true. Court agreeed with this last contention and vacated the improper sentence on the enhancement. Court affirmd the remainder of the judgment.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of nonsuit in his action for medical malpractice against respondents. On the first day of trial, the court denied appellant's motion to continue and granted two of respondents' motions in limine. Those rulings effectively precluded appellant from presenting the evidence necessary to establish breach of the standard of care and causation. Appellant conceded he was unable to prove his case and the court granted respondents' motion for nonsuit. On appeal, appellant contends the court abused its discretion in denying him a short continuance to secure the attendance of a necessary witness. Court affirmed.

Petitioners petitions for a writ of review contending the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) erred by (1) agreeing with one physician over another as to an injured employee's permanent and stationary date, (2) holding the employee harmless from lien claims pursuant to a Compromise and Release, and (3) awarding excessive fees to an interpreter service. Court conclude the WCAB did not sufficiently state the evidence relied upon and specify in detail its award for interpreter fees; court therefore remands the issue to the WCAB.

Appellant, was re-adjudged a ward of the court after he admitted petition allegations charging him with three counts of vandalism and one count of battery. The court aggregated time from prior sustained petitions and committed defendant to the California Youth Authority (CYA) for a maximum term of confinement of six years. On appeal, defendant contends the court misunderstood its discretion to impose a lesser maximum term of confinement. Court found merit to this contention and remanded the matter for further proceedings. In all other respects, court affirms.

Appellant, the alleged father of minors, contends that the juvenile court erred when it denied his request, made at the six-month review hearing, to elevate him to presumed father status. Court agrees with appellant's contention and reverses and remands for further proceedings.

Petitioner, seeks an extraordinary writ to vacate the orders of the juvenile court terminating reunification services and setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing as to his daughters. Court denies the petition.

Plaintiff filed a fraud and breach of contract action against one California corporation, two out-of-state corporations and three non-resident individuals who were corporate officers of one of the out-of-state corporations. The superior court quashed service of summons and complaint on the three individuals. Plaintiff claims that the court had specific jurisdiction over these individuals as to the fraud cause of action. Court found that plaintiff failed to carry its burden of proof as to jurisdiction and affirmed the superior court's order.

Following a jury trial, appellant was convicted of crimes involving the sexual abuse of his two adopted daughters. Counts 1 and 2 charged committing a lewd act upon a child under 14. Count 3 charged misdemeanor sexual battery. Count 4 was the forcible sexual penetration by a foreign object by force, and count 5 was the forcible rape. Appellant was convicted on all counts. Appellant was sentenced to a total of 30 years to life in prison, 15 years each for counts 4 and 5, with other sentences to be served concurrently. Concluding there is no prejudicial error, court affirms the judgment.

Plaintiff appeals from the trial court's order granting a special motion to strike (anti-SLAPP motion), brought by defendants against plaintiff's cause of action for malicious prosecution. Plaintiff argues that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to rule on the anti-SLAPP motion because the motion was untimely; that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing plaintiff to join in the anti-SLAPP motion; that plaintiff made the submission necessary for showing a reasonable probability of prevailing on his malicious prosecution claim; and that the trial court's evidentiary rulings were incorrect.
Court affirms the trial court's order granting defendants' special motion to strike under section 425.16.

Causes of action . All causes of action, including breach of contract, negligence, and fraud, brought by plaintiffs were dismissed, after defendants' demurrers to those causes of action was sustained without leave to amend. This is an appeal from a trial court order vacating a judgment. Finding no error, court affirms.

Defendant was charged with 21 counts of sexual offenses. Defendant pled no contest to three counts of rape by use of drugs, and two counts of sexual penetration of a person incapable of giving consent or unconscious. Defendant later moved to withdraw his plea. This motion was denied. Defendant was sentenced to a total of 16 years in state prison. Defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction contending that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his plea and erred in denying his counsel time to conduct discovery and investigation in preparation for the motion to withdraw the plea. Court affirms the judgment.

The juvenile court sustained a petition alleging that appellant committed an assault with a deadly weapon or by means likely to produce great bodily injury, and committed battery with serious bodily injury, both felonies. The trial court also sustained the allegations that in the commission of the assault and the battery, appellant personally inflicted great bodily harm. The court found that appellant was a person described by Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, adjudged him to be a ward of the court, and placed him in a short term camp community program and in the care, custody and control of the probation officer. The juvenile court determined appellant's maximum period of confinement to be seven years.
Appellant appeals from the orders sustaining the petition and adjudging him a ward of the court, contending that the juvenile court erred in imposing the section 12022.7 enhancement and that probation condition number 12 must be stricken. Court affirms the juvenile court's orders.

The District Attorney of Los Angeles County filed a complaint charging defendant with identity theft, forging and counterfeiting the California state seal, two counts of forgery, and failing to register. The complaint alleged that defendant had suffered six prior convictions and that he served three prior prison terms.
Court is satisfied from the examination of the record that no other arguable issues exist. The judgment is modified to reflect a $20 court security fee for each of defendant's convictions. The judgment is otherwise affirmed.

A jury convicted defendant of unlawful possession of access card account information, unlawful possession of access cards, unlawful possession of a blank check, and receiving stolen property.
On appeal, Defendant contends the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress evidence because the police violated the "knock-and-announce rule." Court affirms.