CA Unpub Decisions

Keith Osby was beaten, bound and transported to a parking lot where he was shot in the head. Several people were separately tried for torturing and killing Osby, including defendant Demarcus Armstrong who was convicted of first degree murder. (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a).) The jury found the murder was committed during a kidnapping (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)) and that defendant personally and intentionally discharged a firearm that proximately caused great bodily injury and death (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)). The jury failed to reach a verdict as to torture (§ 206) and that charge was dismissed. The trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for life without the possibility of parole for murder during a kidnapping, plus a consecutive term of 25 years to life on the firearm enhancement.

Appellant Samantha Christine Anderson appeals from the denial of her application for reduction, filed pursuant to Proposition 47. Appellant contends she was eligible for reduction on two second degree burglary convictions (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460, subd. (b)) because she entered a commercial establishment with the intent to commit larceny by using fraudulent checks to purchase goods. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

L.H. (mother) appeals an order terminating parental rights to S.F., her now 11-year-old daughter. She contends the juvenile court erred in failing to apply the beneficial parental relationship exception to termination of parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i).) We affirm.

L.C. (the minor) contends on appeal there is insufficient evidence to support the trial court’s finding that he violated probation. We agree and reverse the judgment.

We appointed counsel to represent Father on appeal. On March 9, 2017, counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835. Counsel found no arguable issues and asked that we exercise our discretion to allow Father to personally file a supplemental brief. We notified Father that he had 30 days within which to submit any contentions he wished us to consider, and that the failure to do so would result in the dismissal of his appeal as abandoned.
Father filed a letter in which he contends that his attorney was incompetent and rendered ineffective assistance by failing to file a section 388 petition seeking placement of his daughter with a paternal aunt. We affirm.

Plaintiff Theresa Lynne Murphy appeals, by permission of this court, from an order, filed on July 8, 2014, declaring her to be a vexatious litigant (Code Civ. Proc., § 391, subd. (b) ), and ordering that she post an undertaking in the amount of $10,000. We affirm.

During a divorce proceeding initiated by Marcela Diaz (Mother), Fausto Villalobos (Father) petitioned to have their three children returned to Mexico under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, October 25, 1980, T.I.A.S. No. 11670 (Hague Convention). Under the Hague Convention, when a child who was habitually residing in one signatory state is wrongfully removed to another, the latter state must order the return of the child, unless an exception applies. (Lozano v. Montoya Alvarez (2014) 134 S.Ct. 1224, 1228-1229 (Lozano).)

Appellant Robert Leung appeals from a judgment denying his petition for writ of administrative mandate (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5) challenging the termination of his employment as a police officer. The San Francisco Police Commission (Commission) terminated Leung’s employment after sustaining five charges of misconduct, consisting of his alleged unauthorized access of California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) data (specifications one, four, and five), unauthorized dissemination of certain confidential information and CLETS data (specification two), and bringing discredit to the department based on his alleged unauthorized access and dissemination of confidential information and CLETS data (specification three). Specifications one, two, and three, related to data concerning B.B. and specifications four and five related to data concerning brothers L.W and L.W.

Multiple wardship petitions were filed against J.L. (minor). After minor was terminated from the deferred entry of judgment (DEJ) program, the juvenile court found that he came within the provisions of Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 and adjudged him a ward of the court (§ 725, subd. (b)).
On appeal from the judgment (§ 800, subd. (a)), minor raises an insufficiency of the evidence claim against the juvenile court’s finding that he violated Vehicle Code section 20002, subdivision (b), as alleged in count 2 of the petition filed on June 2, 2015. He also attacks probation conditions requiring him to submit his electronic devices and his social media sites to warrantless searches and to provide his passwords thereto as constitutionally overbroad. Minor does not challenge the substantiality of the evidence supporting the juvenile court’s findings as to the truth of other allegations contained in that petition, the propriety of its determination that he comes within th

Mother appeals juvenile court orders vacating these dependency proceedings involving her now 13-year-old daughter and 12-year-old twin sons and granting father sole physical and legal custody of the children. She contends the court abused its discretion in finding that father successfully completed his case plan and in rejecting her request for shared custody. We find no abuse of discretion and shall affirm the court’s orders.

Plaintiffs, a group of Elk Grove residents (Residents), filed a petition for writ of administrative mandamus seeking to overturn a zoning variance granted to their neighbor. Defendant City of Elk Grove approved the variance to allow a garage with guest quarters within the property-line setback required by the city’s zoning code. The trial court denied the writ petition.
Residents now contend (1) the city council did not have authority to approve the variance, (2) the trial court erred and abused its discretion in denying the writ petition, and (3) the city’s approval of the variance violated Government Code section 65906.

Plaintiff Bart Enterprises International, Ltd. appeals from a summary judgment. Defendants AIS Gallagher, also known as Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Management Services, Inc. (AIS Gallagher), and R-T Specialty LLC are insurance brokers. Defendants procured insurance for plaintiff to transport via truck a video tape library from Miami, Florida, to Los Angeles, California. Plaintiff was also transporting a substantial amount of wine with the video tapes and informed defendants of this fact in an e-mail dated May 12, 2011. Defendants told plaintiff they did not believe the concurrent wine shipment would be an issue as to coverage for the video tape library, but they did not inform the insurer about the wine. The truck carrying the video tape library and the wine was stolen on May 17, 2011. Plaintiff sought to recover its losses from the insurer. The insurer asserted, inter alia, the presence of the wine as grounds for voiding the insurance coverage. Following settlement with the insur

Plaintiff appeals from the judgment entered against him after the trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff contends triable issues of material fact remained in his causes of action for racial discrimination and wrongful termination in violation of public policy. We find no error and affirm.

Anna Mackey appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendants Bank of America, N.A. (BANA) and Bank of New York Mellon (Mellon, together defendants) after the trial court sustained a demurrer to her operative complaint without leave to amend. Mackey concedes the trial court properly sustained the demurrer, but contends it abused its discretion by not allowing leave to amend. We reverse the judgment and remand with directions for the trial court to enter a new order sustaining the demurrer with leave to amend.