CA Unpub Decisions

Linda A. appeals from the juvenile court’s February 2016 finding that two of her granddaughters, for whom appellant is the legal guardian, eight–year–old Aubrey A., and four–year–old Kailey F., were subject to dependency jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (a), (b) and (j). She maintains there was insufficient evidence to support the juvenile court’s jurisdictional findings notwithstanding a record that reflects, among other things, that the girls were physically abused, and that appellant permitted the girls’ mother and other adults to use illicit drugs in the home, a residence that was neither safe nor sanitary. We affirm.

Defendant Reggie Cervantes appeals from a judgment sentencing him to 13 years in state prison after a jury convicted him on one count of voluntary manslaughter (Pen. Code, § 192, subd. (a)), and the trial court found prior strike (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(j), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)) allegations to be true. He contends (1) there was insufficient evidence that his conduct–stabbing the victim–caused her death; (2) the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on attempted voluntary manslaughter because the evidence supported a reasonable doubt that his conduct caused the victim’s death; (3) the trial court’s instructing the jury with CALCRIM No. 620 on causation violated his right to due process because it was an argumentative pinpoint instruction that favored the prosecution; and (4) he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his counsel failed to object to the prosecutor’s purportedly improper burden-shifting argu

Oswaldo R. appeals from orders of the juvenile court continuing a previously declared wardship and probation. He challenges a condition of probation requiring him not to “participate in gang-related activities” as unconstitutionally vague because it lacks an express knowledge requirement. We affirm the orders.

Earle B. appeals from a judgment declaring his minor son, C.B., a dependent of the juvenile court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (c) and removing C.B. from his custody. Earle contends the evidence was insufficient to support the jurisdictional and dispositional orders, and there were reasonable alternatives short of removal to protect C.B. We affirm.

Defendant Claudiens Santrail Griffin was found guilty by a jury of first degree residential burglary and inflicting corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition upon a person whom defendant has, or previously had, a dating relationship with. The jury also found true the enhancement that another person other than an accomplice was present in the residence during the commission of the burglary. It also found true the allegation defendant had one strike prior and had served one prior prison term. The trial court sentenced defendant to 13 years in prison and ordered him to pay various fines and fees. Defendant timely appealed.

After the preliminary hearing magistrate denied his motion to suppress evidence, defendant Deandre Leron Stewart entered a plea of no contest to one count of possession of a controlled substance for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378) and admitted having one prior strike conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law. (Pen. Code, §§ 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), 667, subds. (b)-(i).) Pursuant to negotiated disposition, the trial court sentenced defendant to serve two years eight months in state prison and imposed other orders.

James V. (father) appealed from the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26) as to his now five-year-old daughter A.G. After reviewing the juvenile court record, father’s court-appointed counsel informed this court he could find no arguable issues to raise on father’s behalf. This court granted father leave to personally file a letter setting forth a good cause showing that an arguable issue of reversible error exists. (In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, 844 (Phoenix H.).)

G.S. appeals from juvenile court orders dismissing dependency proceedings under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, granting custody of his son to the mother, allowing the mother to move with the child to another state (with visitation), and imposing a five-year restraining order against him. G.S. contends the court erred by dismissing the proceedings, granting the move-away order, terminating his reunification services, and imposing the restraining order for five years.

Courtney M. (mother) appealed from the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26) as to her now one-year-old daughter, R.D. After reviewing the juvenile court record, mother’s court-appointed counsel informed this court she could find no arguable issues to raise on mother’s behalf. This court granted mother leave to personally file a letter setting forth a good cause showing that an arguable issue of reversible error exists. (In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, 844 (Phoenix H.).)
Mother filed a letter but failed to address the termination findings or orders or set forth a good cause showing that any arguable issue of reversible error arose from the section 366.26 hearing. (Phoenix H., supra, 47 Cal.4th at p. 844.) Consequently, we dismiss the appeal.

In this Proposition 47 case, defendant Randy Joe Madrigal appeals an order denying his application for reduction of his felony conviction for receiving a stolen vehicle (Pen. Code, § 496d, subd. (a) ) to a misdemeanor (application for reduction). Defendant contends Proposition 47 (§ 1170.18) implicitly includes a section 496d felony because the crime qualifies for reduction under section 496, subdivision (a), which makes receipt of stolen property valued at $950 or less a misdemeanor.

A jury found defendant Marcaill Wormley guilty of the first degree murder of Branden Anderson (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)), hit and run (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (a)), evading a peace officer (id., § 2800.2, subd. (a)), and attempting to dissuade a witness, V.N. (§ 136.1, subd. (a)(2)). The jury found true allegations defendant personally and intentionally discharged a firearm resulting in death in the commission of the murder (§ 12022.53, subds. (b)-(d)), and attempted to dissuade a witness for the benefit of a criminal street gang, Ridezilla (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true allegations defendant previously suffered a serious felony conviction within the meaning of section 667, subdivision (a) and a prior strike conviction within the meaning of sections 667, subdivision (b) through (i) and 1170.12.

Defendant Anthony Cardona, a Sureño gang member, had an ongoing dispute with his former friend, Noe Cisneros, also a Sureño gang member, but who was in the process of disassociating himself from the gang. In November 2011, Cisneros heard shots being fired near his house and came out to investigate. He joined his neighbor, Alex Ayala, who also heard the shots, in the latter’s driveway. A short time later, a car pulled up and defendant fired two shots at Cisneros and Ayala from the car’s passenger side window. Fortunately, no one was hit.

In 2000, a jury found Terry guilty of one count of felony battery with injury on a peace officer (§ 243, subd. (c)(2)), one count of misdemeanor battery with injury on a peace officer (§ 243, subd. (b)), and two counts of resisting an officer (§ 69)). Additionally, the jury found true the special allegations that Terry had two prior “strike” robbery convictions (§§ 667, 1170.12) and had served two prior prison terms (667.5, subd.(b)). The trial court sentenced him under the “Three Strikes” law to 25 years to life in prison as a third strike offender, plus two consecutive one-year terms for the prior prison term enhancements.

In a March 25, 2016 felony complaint, the People charged Damian Terrell Strong with one count of attempted carjacking (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 215, subd. (a)), and further alleged he personally used a deadly weapon (a knife in the commission of the offense (Pen. Code, § 12022, subd. (b)(1)) and suffered a prison prior (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). The complaint also charged appellant with one count of grand theft of an automobile (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (d)(1)), one count of unlawfully driving or taking a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), one count of misdemeanor hit and run (Veh. Code, § 20002, subd. (a)), and one count of driving with a revoked or suspended license (Veh. Code, § 14601.1, subd. (a)).