California Court of Appeal unpublished opinions (not citable under CRC 8.1115).
-
P. v. Jones CA5
-ooOoo- Defendant Nathaniel Jones was convicted by jury trial of three counts of attempted carjacking, and a single count of assault with a firearm, possession of a firearm by a felon, and misdemeanor resisting arrest. On appeal, he contends (1) the evidence was insufficient to s…
-
P. v. Beltran CA4/3
* * * “An accusatory pleading may charge . . . two or more different offenses of the same class of crimes . . . .” (Pen. Code, § 954.)1 However, a trial court “in the interests of justice and for good cause shown, may in its discretion order that the different offenses or counts …
-
P. v. Morales CA2/6
Fletcher (2025) 18 Cal.5th 576 (Fletcher); requires remand and retrial on the prior strike allegations. We will otherwise affirm. Officer James Roach of the Santa Maria Police Department responded to a domestic disturbance call at the River Ranch Apartments in 2020. Officer Roach…
-
P. v. Soriano CA2/6
Ricardo Soriano appeals after a jury convicted him of willful, deliberate, and premeditated first degree murder (Pen. Code §§ 187, subd. (a), 189; count 1) and possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1); count 2). The jury also found true a firearms allegation as t…
-
P. v. Navarro-Rodriguez CA2/6
Appellant Jose Ramon Navarro-Rodriguez was found guilty of corporal injury to a dating partner (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a))1 and dissuading a witness from reporting a crime (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(1)). The trial court placed him on formal supervised probation for 36 months, one co…
-
P. v. Hernandez CA2/6
Alvino Joe Hernandez appeals after the trial court, following an evidentiary hearing, denied his petition for resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.6. Appellant contends: (1) the record lacks substantial evidence to support the trial court’s findings that appellant is guilt…
-
P. v. Ellison CA2/5
****** A jury convicted Wesley Malik Ellison (defendant) of kidnapping, attempted kidnapping and false imprisonment for the same conduct. Defendant argues that he cannot stand convicted of all three offenses, and the People initially conceded error. We accept the People’s concess…
-
P. v. Huerta CA2/5
Nathaniel Huerta appeals the trial court’s order denying his petition for vacatur of his manslaughter conviction and resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.95 (subsequently renumbered as Penal Code section § 1172.6).1 Following an evidentiary hearing on the matter, the …
-
P. v. Campbell CA2/2
THE COURT: Defendant and appellant Maurice Cornell Campbell (defendant) appeals from a judgment after resentencing pursuant to Penal Code1 section 1172.75. Defendant’s appointed counsel 1 All further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. identified no arguable …
-
P. v. Percy CA2/5
Darin Percy appeals the trial court’s postjudgment order following a full resentencing hearing pursuant to Penal Code1 section 1172.75. Appointed counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), requesting that this court p…
-
P. v. Magee CA2/7
Jeremia Renee Magee appeals from a judgment entered after her no contest plea to issuing a check exceeding $950 without sufficient funds. The trial court sentenced her to two years formal probation and ordered her to make restitution to the victim in the amount of $9,950.10. We a…
-
P. v. Ware CA1/4
Ware’s sentence is hereby vacated and the cause is remanded for further resentencing proceedings so that the court can exercise its discretion in a manner consistent with Wiley and Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (b). If, after taking into account any mitigating factors Ware…
-
P. v. Kazemi CA2/8
Jalal Kazemi, through his appointed attorney, seeks reversal of his criminal conviction on the sole ground that the trial court erroneously refused to declare a second doubt regarding his competency to stand trial. We now affirm the judgment, because Kazemi’s conduct following hi…
-
P. v. Torres CA2/8
Daniel Torres asks us to reverse his convictions due to prosecutorial misconduct. There was neither misconduct nor error. We affirm. Torres faced claims for unlawfully possessing ammunition and contempt of court. (Pen. Code, §§ 30305, subd. (a)(1), 166, subd. (c)(1).) Trial showe…
-
P. v. Davtyan CA2/3
‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗ In 2003, a jury convicted appellant Karapet Davtyan of assault with a firearm and other crimes related to his scheme to kidnap Armen Mkrtumyan for ransom. On April 25, 2019, Davtyan was granted parole. When released from prison, he was placed in Immig…
-
P. v. Malekmirzayans CA2/5
The jury found Khazhogh Malekmirzayans guilty of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code,1 § 245, subd. (a)(1), count 1), exhibiting a deadly weapon (§ 417, subd. (a)(1), count 2), and criminal threats (§ 422, subd. (a); count 3). The jury found true aggravating factors alleged a…
-
P. v. Lovett CA5
-ooOoo- * Before Detjen, Acting P. J., Meehan, J. and Guerra, J. INTRODUCTION After pleading no contest to one count of attempted unlawful sexual intercourse with a person under 18 years of age (Pen. Code, §§ 261.5, subd. (d), 664),1 defendant Jordan Derrick Lovett was sentenced …
-
P. v. Jones CA2/3
‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗ MEMORANDUM OPINION1 Defendant and appellant Ruben Jones appeals from an order denying his second petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6.2 The trial court denied the petition on the ground that it had previously been filed and denied…
-
P. v. Bowen CA5
-ooOoo- * Before Hill, P. J., Detjen, J. and Guerra, J. Appointed counsel for Jerry Bowen (appellant) asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (See People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel filed an opening brief tha…
-
Montelongo v. Simpson Sandblasting and Special Coating CA4/1
Joel Montelongo appeals an order granting Simpson Sandblasting and Special Coatings, Inc. and Ryan Patrick Simpson’s (collectively, respondents) renewed motion to dismiss under Code of Civil Procedure section 1008, subdivision (b). We conclude the trial court did not abuse its di…