CA Unpub Decisions

A jury found Victor Zamora guilty of 11 criminal charges related to domestic violence. On appeal Zamora contends multiple evidentiary errors resulted in cumulative prejudice requiring reversal. We disagree and affirm.

Counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, and requested this court to independently review the record on appeal to determine whether any arguable issues exist.
We sent a notice to defendant, advising him he had 30 days in which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. He has submitted supplemental briefs in which he contends (1) he did not commit the charged crimes and did not understand that he was pleading no contest to all six charges and (2) there is insufficient evidence to support the finding that he violated his probation. Defendant’s first claim is not cognizable on appeal. There is substantial evidence to support the trial court’s finding that defendant violated his probation. We affirm the trial court’s order.

Defendant and appellant Freddie Lee Weston was charged with murder during a burglary and a robbery. (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a); 190.2, subds. (a)(17)(A), (G).) It was further alleged that he used a deadly weapon within the meaning of section 12022, subdivision (b)(1), and a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (b). On the 12th day of trial, defendant pled guilty to first degree murder in exchange for dismissal of all enhancements, and a promise by the trial court that his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda) would be preserved. He was sentenced to 25 years to life in state prison. The trial court issued a certificate of probable cause, and defendant appealed. He contends his confession was obtained in violation of Miranda; alternatively, he asserts that if his guilty plea forecloses appellate review of this issue, the case must be remanded to allow him the

Defendant and appellant, Mark Aaron Vaughn, filed a petition for reclassification of his felony offense conviction to a misdemeanor pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.18, which the court denied. On appeal, defendant contends the court erred in denying his petition. We affirm.

Defendant Victor Edgar Soto was convicted of murder and attempted murder for a gang-related shooting that occurred in 1996. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in denying his post-trial request for discovery of officer personnel records under Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess). In addition, the parties agree that the trial court made several minor sentencing errors. We instruct the court to correct the sentencing errors, and otherwise affirm.

Appellant was convicted of one count each of sexual intercourse with a child age 10 or younger and continuous sexual abuse. (Pen. Code, §§ 288.7, subd. (a), 288.5, subd. (a).) He alleges a violation of section 288.5, subdivision (c) (hereafter section 288.5(c)), which prohibits dual convictions for continuous sexual abuse and another sex offense involving the same victim and the same time period. While conceding section 288.5(c) was violated in this case, respondent maintains appellant forfeited his right to invoke that provision because he did not demur to the charges. We reject this forfeiture argument and reverse appellant’s conviction for continuous sexual abuse. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment.

Defendant Jerry Richard Salazar contends on appeal that the trial court miscalculated his presentence custody credits. The People concede and we agree.
On December 28, 2015, defendant pled guilty to unlawfully driving or taking a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), and he admitted having suffered a prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and having served a prior prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)).
On April 5, 2016, the trial court sentenced defendant to three years eight months in prison: 16 months, doubled pursuant to the “Three Strikes” law, plus a one-year prior prison term enhancement. The court calculated 117 days of actual time and 116 conduct credits for a total of 233 days of credit.

Appointed counsel for defendant Roxanne A. asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We sent a letter to defendant, advising her of her right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. Defendant responded with a 44-page supplemental brief in which she contends defense counsel was ineffective for various reasons, and explains the existence of a “Widespread Criminal Chain Conspiracy” and a lack of jurisdiction in Madera County. We find no arguable issues.

Kevin O’Rourke Parten appeals from an order after the trial court denied his petition for a certificate of rehabilitation and pardon. Parten argues the trial court erred by denying his petition because his equal protection rights were violated. We disagree and affirm the order.

Michelle Elaine Mullin appeals from the judgment imposed after the trial court found her in violation of probation and sentenced her to county jail. (Pen. Code, § 1237, subd. (b).)
Mullin pled no contest to leaving the scene of an accident. (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (a).) The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed her on formal probation. The court also ordered her to stay away from three people named in a protective order. Mullin’s probation officer subsequently alleged that she made contact with two of those people. The court found Mullin in violation of the protective order, revoked probation, and sentenced her to county jail.

Spencer Moss appeals the trial court’s order committing him for treatment as a mentally disordered offender (MDO). (Pen. Code, § 2972.) Moss contends the commitment order should be vacated because the court erred when it permitted his attorney to waive his right to a jury trial over his objection without finding that he lacked the capacity to make a knowing and voluntary waiver of that right. (See People v. Blackburn (2015) 61 Cal.4th 1113, 1125 (Blackburn).) We vacate the order and remand.

A jury convicted defendant of felony sodomy of a minor (Pen. Code, § 286, subd. (b)(1); count 1), felony oral copulation of a minor (§ 288a, subd. (b)(1); count 2); and felony distribution of harmful matter to a minor (§ 288.2, subd. (a)(1); count 3). The jury was hung on count 4, contacting a child with the intent to commit specified sex crimes (§ 288.3, subd. (a)), and the court dismissed it on the People’s motion. The jury found defendant guilty on count 5, contacting a minor with the intent to engage in lewd conduct (§ 288.4, subd. (b)), but the court granted defendant’s motion for a new trial on that count on the ground of insufficient evidence and subsequently dismissed it. The court sentenced defendant to the low term of two years on count 3, a consecutive eight months (1/3 of the midterm) on count 1, and a concurrent 16 months on count 2, for a total of two years, eight months in state prison.
Defendant’s sole argument on appeal is that the prosecutor failed to

Oscar Medina (defendant) was convicted by a jury of 13 narcotics-related offenses which arose from events on June 9, August 3 and October 23, 2009. Defendant admitted that he had suffered a prior serious or violent felony conviction within the meaning of the Three Strikes law. The trial court sentenced him to a total term of 43 years four months in prison.
Defendant appeals, raising claims of insufficiency of the evidence, instructional error, abuse of discretion in the admission of expert testimony and sentencing error. He also requests we review the sealed transcripts of the hearings on his Pitchess motion.

Defendant Gerald McMillan appeals from the order denying his request for sentence modification and release under Proposition 57, the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016. (See Cal. Const., art. I, § 32.) His appointed counsel filed a no-issue brief under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. McMillan filed a supplemental brief.