CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant and appellant Eric Laurence Murphy attacked his mother’s boyfriend with a machete. Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(1), and sentenced to three years in state prison with credit for time served. Defendant appeals from the judgment. Based on our independent review of the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment.

Defendant and appellant, Noel Velazquez, filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.18, which the court denied. On appeal, defendant contends the court erred in denying his petition. We reverse.

S.H. (Mother) has a history of abusing drugs and neglecting her eight-year-old son A.T. and six-year-old daughter R.T. As a result, Mother’s two children were removed from her care in 2012 when A.T. was three years old and R.T. was six months old. Following five years in the dependency system, the juvenile court terminated parental rights and freed the children for adoption. On appeal, Mother argues that the juvenile court erred in denying her Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 petition and that the juvenile court erred in failing to apply the beneficial parental relationship exception to termination of parental rights. We find no error, and affirm the judgment.

Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Collette C. Cavalier and Adrian R. Contreras, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
A Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition alleged that defendant and appellant P.F. (minor) evaded a peace officer while driving in willful and wanton disregard for safety, a felony. (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a), count 1.) On a motion by the People, the court reduced the allegation to a misdemeanor. Minor admitted the allegation as true. Following a contested disposition hearing, a juvenile court declared minor a ward and placed him on formal probation in the custody of his mother, under specified terms and conditions.
On appeal, minor contends that the court abused its discretion when it declared him a ward of the court and imposed formal probation without properly considering nonwardship probation. We affirm.

Defendant and appellant Hector Lopez Ozuna, Jr., appeals from the trial court’s order denying his petition for resentencing under Proposition 47 because it found he was likely to commit a super strike if resentenced. Because of defendant’s long, repeated, and violent criminal history; his unsatisfactory behavior in prison and on parole; his long-term drug addiction; and his continuing acts of violence and use and possession of weapons, despite his advancing age and physical infirmities, we affirm.

Defendant and appellant Cloyd Lee Marshall, Jr., is serving eight years in prison after pleading guilty to human trafficking. He asks this court to remand the matter to the trial court so it can dismiss the remaining charges and allegations pursuant to the plea agreement. The People concede, and we agree. The matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to dismiss counts 1, 3, 4, and 5 of the information and both allegations.

Defendant Alastair Canida appeals from judgment entered following a jury conviction for attempted robbery (Pen. Code, § 211). The trial court sentenced defendant to two years in prison. Defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion by denying his motion to reopen the case, thereby depriving him of his right to testify in his own defense. Defendant also contends there was insufficient evidence to support his attempted robbery conviction, and the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of attempted grand theft. We reject defendant’s contentions and affirm the judgment.

Defendant Juan Pablo Guerrero appeals from judgment entered following jury convictions for elder abuse of his mother (Pen. Code, § 368, subd. (b)(1) ; count 1); criminal threats against defendant’s mother (§ 422; count 2); and assault likely to cause great bodily injury (GBI) against defendant’s sister (§ 245, subd. (a)(4); count 3). The jury also found true allegations of GBI as to count 3, but not as to count 1. The court sentenced defendant to a prison term of eight years eight months.
Defendant contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) on the grounds his trial attorney (1) failed to object to admission of evidence of a prior conviction for assault, (2) failed to request a limiting instruction regarding the prior assault evidence, and (3) failed to object to the prosecutor’s closing argument regarding the prior assault evidence. Defendant also objects to being sentenced separately on counts 1 and 2 in violation of section 654. We reject defendant’

While prowling homes, defendant and appellant Trayvon Johnson attempted to burglarize and burglarized several homes. A jury found defendant guilty of one count of first degree residential burglary (Pen. Code, § 459, count 1), one count of attempted first degree residential burglary (§§ 664, 459, count 2), and one count of knowingly receiving stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a), count 3). In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true that defendant had suffered one prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)), one prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)), and one prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)), all based on a December 2010 residential burglary conviction. As a result, defendant was sentenced to a total term of 18 years four months in state prison, with 960 days’ credit for time served as follows: the upper term of six years on count 1, doubled to 12 years due to the prior strike conviction; a consecutive term of one

Defendant Matthew Early Robinson robbed a business owner and employee at gunpoint. While fleeing from law enforcement in his car, defendant crashed and was severely injured. Defendant claims to have suffered amnesia, preventing him from remembering anything about the charged crimes.
Defendant appeals from judgment entered following jury convictions for two counts of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211 ; counts 1 and 2). The jury also found true as to both counts, enhancements that defendant personally used a firearm (§§ 1192.7, subd. (c)(8); 12022.53, subd. (b).) The court dismissed count 3, grand theft of a firearm (§ 487, subd. (d)(2)), and count 4, receiving stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)). Defendant was sentenced to 12 years in prison.

Following a conviction for first degree murder and attempted premeditated murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 664), Daniel Emanuel Martinez received a sentence of 22 years 4 months plus 50 years to life in prison. Martinez raises one claim on appeal, that the trial court erred in denying his Batson/Wheeler motion after the prosecutor peremptorily excused three Hispanic prospective jurors. The trial court denied the motion, concluding Martinez had failed to make a prima facie showing of discrimination. We agree and affirm.

A jury convicted defendant Francisco Delacruz of willful, deliberate, and premeditated attempted murder (§§ 187, subd. (a),/664, and189) and found true the personal gun use enhancement. (§ 12022.53, subds. (b) and (c).) The trial court sentenced defendant to an indeterminate prison term of seven years to life, and a determinate term of 20 years. On appeal, defendant argues the evidence was insufficient to support his attempted murder conviction and the court erred by not giving a sua sponte instruction on the lesser included offense of attempted voluntary manslaughter based on sudden quarrel or heat of passion. Defendant also asserts various issues related to his sentence. With some modifications, we affirm the judgment.

This probate matter centers on two pieces of real property and two bank accounts of Mattie Weaver, the decedent and the mother of four children, objector and appellant Sharon Foreman, and real parties in interest and respondents Stanley Foreman, Ross Foreman, and Regina Holt. Petitioner and respondent Lyle Stotlemyer, in his capacity as the administrator of Weaver’s estate, brought a petition pursuant to Probate Code section 850, seeking to have the proceeds from the sale of the two properties and the funds from the bank accounts returned to the estate. Sharon objected to the petition. After a trial, the trial court found that two quitclaim deeds, transferring the properties at issue from Weaver to Sharon, were invalid. It further found clear and convincing evidence that Weaver had intended the funds in one of the two bank accounts at issue to be distributed upon her death equally among the four children, rather than to Sharon alone. On that basis, it ordered Sharon to return

S.K. (mother) appeals from the juvenile court's order terminating parental rights for her two children. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) Mother contends there was insufficient evidence to support the court's finding of the children's adoptability. She further contends the court erred in failing to find the beneficial parental relationship exception to adoption applied. (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i)). As we explain, we disagree with both contentions and thus affirm the order of the court.