CA Pub. Decisions

Jennifer H. appeals orders terminating parental rights under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. She also appeals an order summarily denying her petition for modification under section 388. Jennifer asserts the court did not comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA or federal act). Court affirm.

Defendant Fidencio Carillo Alvarado appeals from judgment entered following jury convictions for attempted lewd act on a child under 14 years old (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 288, subd. (a)[1]; count 1); attempted dissuading of a witness (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(1); count 2); and misdemeanor lewd and unlawful exposure (§ 314, subd. (1); count 4). The trial court declared a mistrial as to counts 3 and 5 because the jury was unable to reach a verdict. The trial court also dismissed count 6, willful failure to appear while on bail (§ 1320.5). The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation for five years, subject to various terms and conditions.

What the heck?!? At one point, the trial court commented, â€

We hold, as a matter of first impression, the provision in a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy requiring the insurer to â€

Consistent with First Amendment principles, California has a long-standing tradition of open civil proceedings. This applies with equal force to family law cases, although trial courts may redact or seal particular documents to protect private information concerning an overriding privacy interest, including matters pertaining to the custody and visitation of minor children. (NBC Subsidiary (KNBC-TV), Inc. v. Superior Court (1999) 20 Cal.4th 1178 (NBC Subsidiary); In re Marriage of Burkle (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 1045 (Burkle).)

Plaintiffs California Teachers Association (CTA) and the Salinas Elementary Teachers Council (SETC) (collectively, the unions) brought an action against defendants Governing Board of the Salinas City Elementary School District and the Salinas City Elementary School District (collectively, the District). The action alleged that the District's interpretation of the parties' collective bargaining agreement created teacher pay disparities in violation of Education Code section 45028,[1] and that contract language freezing advancement for some but not all teachers for the 2005-2006 school year created additional salary uniformity violations. The District demurred on the ground the court lacked jurisdiction because the unions had not adequately pleaded exhaustion of the administrative remedy specified in the collective bargaining agreement. The trial court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend and dismissed the action.
On appeal, the unions claim the sustaining of the demurrer was error.[2] They contend that (1) â€

Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising from the murder of Ivon Pontbriant in her home in Visalia, California on March 1, 1988. As to each defendant, the jury found true three special circumstance allegations -- that the murder was committed in the course of the burglary, attempted rape, and robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), (C), (G)) -- and returned a verdict of death. The trial court, having denied defendants' motions for new trial and the automatic applications to modify the verdicts (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), sentenced defendants to death and to consecutive prison terms of six years eight months for the noncapital offenses. This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment as to each defendant in its entirety.

Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising from the murder of Ivon Pontbriant in her home in Visalia, California on March 1, 1988. As to each defendant, the jury found true three special circumstance allegations -- that the murder was committed in the course of the burglary, attempted rape, and robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), (C), (G)) -- and returned a verdict of death. The trial court, having denied defendants' motions for new trial and the automatic applications to modify the verdicts (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), sentenced defendants to death and to consecutive prison terms of six years eight months for the noncapital offenses. This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment as to each defendant in its entirety.

Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising from the murder of Ivon Pontbriant in her home in Visalia, California on March 1, 1988. As to each defendant, the jury found true three special circumstance allegations -- that the murder was committed in the course of the burglary, attempted rape, and robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), (C), (G)) -- and returned a verdict of death. The trial court, having denied defendants' motions for new trial and the automatic applications to modify the verdicts (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), sentenced defendants to death and to consecutive prison terms of six years eight months for the noncapital offenses. This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment as to each defendant in its entirety.

Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising from the murder of Ivon Pontbriant in her home in Visalia, California on March 1, 1988. As to each defendant, the jury found true three special circumstance allegations -- that the murder was committed in the course of the burglary, attempted rape, and robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), (C), (G)) -- and returned a verdict of death. The trial court, having denied defendants' motions for new trial and the automatic applications to modify the verdicts (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), sentenced defendants to death and to consecutive prison terms of six years eight months for the noncapital offenses. This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment as to each defendant in its entirety.

Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising from the murder of Ivon Pontbriant in her home in Visalia, California on March 1, 1988. As to each defendant, the jury found true three special circumstance allegations -- that the murder was committed in the course of the burglary, attempted rape, and robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), (C), (G)) -- and returned a verdict of death. The trial court, having denied defendants' motions for new trial and the automatic applications to modify the verdicts (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), sentenced defendants to death and to consecutive prison terms of six years eight months for the noncapital offenses. This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment as to each defendant in its entirety.

Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising from the murder of Ivon Pontbriant in her home in Visalia, California on March 1, 1988. As to each defendant, the jury found true three special circumstance allegations -- that the murder was committed in the course of the burglary, attempted rape, and robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), (C), (G)) -- and returned a verdict of death. The trial court, having denied defendants' motions for new trial and the automatic applications to modify the verdicts (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), sentenced defendants to death and to consecutive prison terms of six years eight months for the noncapital offenses. This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment as to each defendant in its entirety.

Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising from the murder of Ivon Pontbriant in her home in Visalia, California on March 1, 1988. As to each defendant, the jury found true three special circumstance allegations -- that the murder was committed in the course of the burglary, attempted rape, and robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), (C), (G)) -- and returned a verdict of death. The trial court, having denied defendants' motions for new trial and the automatic applications to modify the verdicts (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), sentenced defendants to death and to consecutive prison terms of six years eight months for the noncapital offenses. This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment as to each defendant in its entirety.

Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising from the murder of Ivon Pontbriant in her home in Visalia, California on March 1, 1988. As to each defendant, the jury found true three special circumstance allegations -- that the murder was committed in the course of the burglary, attempted rape, and robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), (C), (G)) -- and returned a verdict of death. The trial court, having denied defendants' motions for new trial and the automatic applications to modify the verdicts (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), sentenced defendants to death and to consecutive prison terms of six years eight months for the noncapital offenses. This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment as to each defendant in its entirety.