P. v. Mahdavi

Filed 3/21/06 P. v. Mahdavi CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Ronald P. Kreber, Judge. Affirmed.

Michael R. Totaro, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Barry J.T. Carlton and Elizabeth S. Voorhies, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Azita Mahdavi was convicted of multiple counts of grand theft, forgery and tax fraud and one count of unauthorized deletion of computer data. She contends the court should have declared a mistrial after the jury learned she had previously pled guilty to one of the counts. She also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and the legality of her prison sentence. Finding no reason to disturb the judgment, we affirm.

* * *

Mahdavi was the bookkeeper, controller and then CFO for a computer consulting firm called Relational Data Systems (RDS). In those various capacities, she maintained and had complete control over the firm's financial records. She wrote all of the checks and also administered the firm's cash advance program, which allowed employees to obtain advances on their paychecks. Mahdavi herself participated in the program from time to time, but instead of deducting the amount of her advances from her paychecks, she always took a full paycheck, which provided her with an authorized windfall. She also forged various documents and checks and wrongfully diverted the firm's funds to herself on several other occasions. She also failed to pay taxes on the monies she misappropriated, which amounted to $250,612.69.

Mahdavi also lied about her educational and professional credentials. She said she received a degree in accounting from the University of Minnesota, but actually, she never attended the school. She also claimed she passed all four parts of the CPA exam. David Chang, one of the firm's founders, testified that he had promised Mahdavi that if she passed the exam, the firm would give her a $5,000 bonus, a $5,000 salary increase and make her CFO. Chang made good on his promise when Mahdavi told him she had passed the exam, and the firm also threw her a big party. However, it turned out Mahdavi failed all four parts of the exam.

When Mahdavi's financial misdeeds began to surface, Chang asked her for an explanation about certain matters, including a large cashier's check she allegedly misappropriated. Mahdavi insisted she had redeposited the check into the firm's account, but Chang refused to take her word for it. He told her he wanted proof that she had actually done so. About a week later, Mahdavi gave Chang a deposit slip that purportedly showed the check had been redeposited, but it was obviously a phony slip. When confronted by Chang, Mahdavi admitted she had fabricated the slip. She said, â€