CA Unpub Decisions

In this breach of contract case, appellant Meridian Health Services Holdings, Inc. (Meridian) appeals from the judgment in favor of respondents Run Management LLC (Run), Darshan Shah and Rajal Shah (collectively, Respondents) on their complaint for breach of contract. In particular, Meridian appeals the trial court’s summary adjudication, which concluded both that Meridian owed a duty to Respondents to pay quarterly interest on Meridian bonds despite Meridian’s alleged financial difficulties and that Meridian breached that duty.

In order to protect a family member from potential criminal liability for forging home-loan-related documents, the relatives who had title to the real property that served as security for the loan chose not to disclose the forgery until years after they discovered it. They first disclosed the fraud only in connection with a lawsuit they brought against the lender, after the lender had foreclosed on the property and evicted the occupants via an unlawful detainer action. We consider whether judgment was properly entered for the lender on statute of limitations and claim preclusion grounds.

Defendant Ellery Dennis Thomas used “mental manipulation” to coerce his 23-year-old daughter into participating in various sex acts with him against her will. She secretly audio recorded one instance of this; the recording was played for the jury, and it strongly corroborated her testimony about the other instances. Evidence was also admitted that defendant had committed an uncharged lewd act against her when she was 13.

Appointed counsel for defendant Joseph Phillip Nasca asks this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment.

Sammy Davis Morgan appeals from an order finding him in violation of the terms of his Post Release Community Supervision. His attorney has filed a brief seeking our independent review of the record, pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (see Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738), in order to determine whether there is any arguable issue on appeal. We find no arguable issue and affirm.

A probation search of appellant Jesse James Monreal’s listed residence, conducted in his absence, yielded a gun, ammunition, and cocaine from a locked safe in a bedroom closet. Monreal was convicted by jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1)), possession of ammunition by a felon (§ 30305, subd. (a)(1)), and possession of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)). Monreal contends the evidence was insufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the contraband items were his. We affirm.

Appointed counsel for defendant Michael Anthony Luna 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.) Defendant was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant. We find no arguable issues, but remand for correction of the abstract of judgment.

Appointed counsel for defendant David Luna has asked us to review his conviction pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Finding no error that could arguably benefit defendant, we affirm.

Following a bench trial, the court convicted Stanley Gleason of one count each of assault with a deadly weapon, carrying a dirk or dagger, and criminal threats, and found true an enhancement allegation that Gleason inflicted great bodily injury in committing the assault. (Pen. Code, §§ 245, subd. (a)(1), 422, subd. (a), 12022.7, 21310.) The court sentenced Gleason to six years in prison.
Gleason contends that the trial court improperly induced him to waive his right to a jury trial, rendering his waiver invalid. We disagree and affirm the judgment.

A jury convicted defendant Dominic Daniel of second degree murder after he brutally beat to death his girlfriend, Tsega Tsegay, and the trial court sentenced him to 15 years to life in prison. On appeal, Daniel claims that the court erred by (1) admitting general expert testimony about domestic violence and (2) failing to instruct the jury that this testimony was not evidence that he committed the charged crime. We affirm.

Defendant Jason Connelly appeals after the trial court found him in violation of his probation and imposed new conditions of probation. He contends certain conditions of his probation are unconstitutionally vague and overbroad and that substantial evidence does not support the trial court’s finding that he violated probation. We agree that the condition prohibiting defendant from possessing pornography was unconstitutionally vague, that the finding that he violated his probation must therefore be reversed, and that the new conditions must be stricken.

Defendant and appellant Foryce Bussey, Jr., pled guilty to assault with a deadly weapon, a knife, and admitted both a great bodily injury (GBI) enhancement, and a prior strike. (Pen. Code, §§ 245, subd. (a)(1); 12022.7, subd. (a); 667, subds. (b)-(j); 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d).) In accord with a negotiated plea agreement, the trial court sentenced Bussey to a term of nine years in prison as follows: the mid-term of three years for the aggravated assault offense, doubled to six years for the prior strike, plus three years for the GBI enhancement. The court awarded Bussey a total of 148 days of custody credits for 129 days of actual local time in custody, plus 19 days of local conduct credits. Further, the court ordered Bussey to pay a series of regular restitution fines, fees and assessments. Bussey’s appointed counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We affirm the judgment.

Defendant Lance Anderson shot and killed his wife and severely disabled sister and told detectives he did so to end their suffering and “send them home.” Defendant was charged with two counts of murder and several firearm use enhancements. At the ensuing bench trial, the trial court admitted defendant’s incriminating statements to detectives over his objection that his Miranda rights were violated. It also rejected defendant’s argument that he was culpable only of voluntary manslaughter because he was overcome by passionate feelings of helplessness in the face of the victims’ prolonged suffering. The trial court found defendant guilty as charged and sentenced him to an aggregate term of 100 years to life.

City of Long Beach appeals a judgment for $99,000 in pain and suffering damages in favor of Alberto Mendez in a crosswalk trip-and-fall case. We affirm the judgment.