500 matching results for "abundy":
From CA Unpub Decisions
Sling Technologies, Inc. appeals an order disqualifying its counsel, Eric Woosley and the Law Offices of Woosley & Porter (collectively Woosley) from representing it in this case and the related arbitration. Sling contends the disqualification order is an abuse of discretion because it contains no factual findings; that Woosley did not previously represent Sling’s adversary iNet, Inc., doing business as iParq (iParq); that there is no substantial relationship between this matter and a prior matter in which Woosley represented a different entity, iParq LLC (the LLC); and that Woosley did not obtain any material confidential information from the LLC in the prior matter. We affirm.
|
From CA Unpub Decisions
Appellant Stephen Michael Budgell was convicted of carrying a concealed dirk or dagger in violation of Penal Code section 21310. He contends that statute is constitu-tionally infirm. We reject his challenges and affirm.
|
From CA Unpub Decisions
Clifton Octaveus Miller (defendant) appeals from the trial court’s order revoking his probation and imposing the previously imposed sentence. We appointed counsel to represent him on this appeal.
Counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), and requested this court to independently review the record on appeal to determine whether any arguable issues exist. On October 30, 2017, we sent defendant a letter informing him of the nature of the brief that had been filed and advising him that he had 30 days to file a supplemental brief setting forth issues he wished this court to consider. We have received no response. There is substantial evidence to support the trial court’s finding that defendant violated his probation. We affirm the trial court’s order. |
From CA Unpub Decisions
A jury convicted defendant Jarrod Boxie of second degree murder and possession of a firearm by a felon. He was sentenced to 40 years to life in state prison. On appeal, he argues the trial court erred in (1) not ordering the disclosure of the identity of a confidential informant, (2) denying his motion for a new trial, and (3) staying a gang enhancement. We conclude the court did not err in denying defendant’s motion for disclosure of the informant’s identify, or denying a new trial. As to the gang enhancement, the attorney general concedes and we agree it should be stricken.
In supplemental briefing, defendant contends that legislation effective January 1, 2018, ending the statutory prohibition on a trial court’s ability to strike a firearm enhancement applies and requires a remand for a new sentencing hearing. We agree that the new legislation applies retroactively to defendant, however, we conclude a remand for resentencing is not required. |
From CA Unpub Decisions
Sandra V., born in 1997, appeals from a juvenile court order terminating non-minor dependent jurisdiction. Since the inception of this appeal, the juvenile court has again assumed jurisdiction over Sandra. The appeal is, therefore, moot, and we are without jurisdiction to do anything other than dismiss the appeal.
|
From CA Unpub Decisions
Dallin H. appeals from a five-year restraining order that the trial court entered pursuant to the Domestic Violence Protection Act (DVPA), Family Code section 6200 et. seq. Dallin contends that the trial court applied the wrong legal standard and abused its discretion in deciding to grant the order. He also argues that the trial court erred in refusing his request to continue the hearing. We disagree and affirm.
|
From CA Unpub Decisions
A jury convicted defendant and appellant Gary Crownover of robbery, in violation of Penal Code section 211, and also found true an allegation pursuant to section 12022.53, subdivision (b), that Crownover personally used a firearm in the commission of the offense. The trial court sentenced Crownover to 12 years in prison, including a 10-year firearm enhancement, pursuant to section 12022.53, subdivision (b).
|
From CA Unpub Decisions
Carmel C. Harper, in propria persona, appeals from a postjudgment order of the superior court terminating her spousal support from her ex-husband, Andrew Harper. We affirm.
|
From CA Unpub Decisions
Gombert (Mike) Yepremyan was shot and killed on November 18, 2009. Defendants and appellants Vahagn Jurian, Zareh Manjikian, and Khatun Vardanian were tried for his killing. A jury convicted all defendants of conspiracy to commit assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code , §§ 182, 245, subd. (a)(1)), and convicted Jurian and Manjikian of first degree murder (§ 187). Additionally, the jury made true findings with respect to Jurian and Vardanian that a principal in the offense was armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1); and that Manjikian had personally discharged a firearm causing death or great bodily injury (§ 12022.53, subds. (b), (c), (d)).
The trial court sentenced Vardanian to probation for five years, Manjikian to prison for 50 years to life, and Jurian to prison for 25 years to life. For the reasons discussed below, the judgments are affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions. |
From CA Unpub Decisions
Orzell Long appeals in propria persona from a workplace violence restraining order. Because we conclude that substantial evidence in the record supports the lower court’s decision to issue the restraining order, we shall affirm.
|
From CA Unpub Decisions
Defendant Oscar Gilberto Patino was sentenced to state prison for an aggregate term of 60 years to life after a jury found him guilty of 12 felonies and their accompanying enhancement allegations. All of the charges related to sexual acts committed against minors.
The major issues on this appeal concern testimony provided at trial about Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS). “It is beyond dispute that CSAAS testimony is inadmissible to prove that a molestation actually occurred. It can be highly prejudicial if not properly handled by the trial court. It is unusual evidence in that it is expert testimony designed to explain the state of mind of a complaining witness. The particular aspects of CSAAS are as consistent with false testimony as with true testimony. For these reasons, the admissibility of such testimony must be handled carefully by the trial court. |
From CA Unpub Decisions
Defendants Mohammed Khan and Manuel Trujillo were convicted by a jury of first degree murder and attempted voluntary manslaughter. Khan was also convicted of cultivation of marijuana, and an arming enhancement was found true as to Trujillo. Trujillo and Kahn both appeal, Trujillo making three fundamental arguments in which Khan joins: (1) instructional error; (2) insufficiency of evidence in three particulars; and (3) double jeopardy. Khan makes an additional argument, insufficiency of evidence as to the conviction for attempted voluntary manslaughter. We conclude that none of the arguments has merit, and we affirm.
|
From CA Unpub Decisions
K.F. (hereafter “mother”) has filed a petition for extraordinary writ challenging the juvenile court’s orders terminating reunification services and setting the matter for a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 permanency planning hearing with respect to her son, J.F. Mother claims she should have been granted additional reunification services because the Santa Clara County Department of Family and Children’s Services (Department) failed to provide her with reasonable services and failed to facilitate visitation.
For the reasons stated below, we will deny mother’s writ petition. |
From CA Unpub Decisions
Appeal from orders of the Superior Court of Orange County, Thomas H. Schulte, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Motion to dismiss appeal. Request for Judicial Notice. Order on preliminary injunction affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part. Order allowing receiver to hire counsel affirmed. Motion and request denied.
|