Fear Not Law Articles: P. v. Trani

P. v. Trani

Filed 1/10/07 P. v. Trani 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

ANTHONY WILLIAM TRANI,

Defendant and Appellant.

G036493

(Super. Ct. No. 04CF2159)

O P I N I O N

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gregg L. Prickett, Judge. Affirmed as modified.

Stephen L. Hinkle, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Ronald A. Jakob and Bradley A. Weinreb, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * *

A jury convicted defendant, Anthony William Trani, inter alia, of two counts of making fraudulent material statements for the purpose of obtaining workers' compensation benefits. Trani contends that, because the magistrate dismissed one of those counts at the preliminary hearing, the superior court should have granted his Penal Code section 995 motion to dismiss that count after the People refiled it.[1] He also asserts insufficient evidence supported the verdict on that count and the court improperly sentenced him to consecutive terms in violation of section 654. Finally, he claims he is entitled to additional presentence custody credit. We agree the trial court miscalculated Trani's presentence credit. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment.

FACTS

A felony complaint charged Trani with five counts of making a fraudulent material statement to obtain workers' compensation (Ins. Code, § 1871.4, subd. (a)(1)),[2] and one count of attempted perjury under oath (§§ 664, 118, subd. (a)). The sole witness at the preliminary hearing, Carson Pierce, an Insurance Department investigator of fraudulent workers' compensation claims, testified for the People. Pierce had investigated Trani's workers' compensation claim, and based on his review of the file and interviews with witnesses, testified to the following.

Trani's claim was based on an alleged July 29, 2003 accident he suffered while employed by Ultimate Staffing at Cast-Rite Corporation.[3] Because Trani complained of pain, Cast-Rite placed him on â€

Description	A jury convicted defendant, inter alia, of two counts of making fraudulent material statements for the purpose of obtaining workers' compensation benefits. Defendant contends that, because the magistrate dismissed one of those counts at the preliminary hearing, the superior court should have granted his Penal Code section 995 motion to dismiss that count after the People refiled it. Defendant also asserts insufficient evidence supported the verdict on that count and the court improperly sentenced him to consecutive terms in violation of section 654. Finally, he claims he is entitled to additional presentence custody credit. Court agree the trial court miscalculated Defendant's presentence credit. In all other respects, court affirm the judgment.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.