CA Unpub Decisions

On June 3, 2018, defendant was released on parole. On October 8, 2020, a petition was filed to revoke his parole, alleging violation of multiple conditions of parole. Following a hearing before a commissioner acting as temporary judge, parole was revoked and reinstated. Defendant appeals.

Laura Tejeda (Wife) appeals an order awarding pendente lite attorney fees from Hasmukh Davda (Husband) in their dissolution proceeding.

Appellant Kern Water Bank Authority (KWBA) appeals from the judgment granting respondent Buena Vista Water Storage District’s (Buena Vista) petition for a writ of mandate. KWBA contends the trial court erred in finding its environmental impact report (EIR) inadequate pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). We agree the EIR was adequate and reverse.

Jesse Angel Contreras appeals the judgment entered after he pleaded no contest to being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition (Pen. Code, §§ 29800, subd. (a)(1), 30305, subd. (a)). The trial court imposed a three-year state prison sentence, suspended its execution, and placed appellant on three years of probation with terms and conditions including that he serve 150 days in county jail. Appellant contends the court erred in denying his motion to suppress the firearm and ammunition under the good faith exception to the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule. He also contends that his term of probation must be reduced to two years pursuant to section 1203.1 as amended effective January 1, 2021. We agree with the latter contention and we shall order the judgment so modified. Otherwise, we affirm.

A jury convicted appellant Raphael Harper III of corporal injury to a “dating partner” (Pen. Code, § 273.5 ). The court sentenced him to 120 days in jail, suspended imposition of the sentence, and granted him three years of probation.

Plaintiff Abelardo Martinez, Jr. (plaintiff) sued Diamond Hill Vineyards, LLC (defendant) for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51 et seq.) based on its operation of a commercial website that is allegedly inaccessible to people who are blind. Plaintiff’s single cause of action rests on two theories: (1) intentional discrimination; and (2) violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.) (ADA), which the Unruh Civil Rights Act (the Unruh Act) incorporates. (§ 51, subd. (f).) We consider whether the trial court erred in dismissing the action on the ground that plaintiff did not allege the nexus between defendant’s website and its “brick and mortar” facilities that the law requires.

Marco Ortiz sued Related Management Company (Related) alleging employment discrimination and violations of the Labor Code, among other causes of action. The trial court ordered all of the matter except for a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claim (Lab. Code, §§ 2698 et seq.) to arbitration. The arbitrator granted Related’s motion for summary adjudication in the arbitration proceeding. Related moved the trial court for an order confirming the arbitration award, and Ortiz filed a motion to vacate the arbitration award. The trial court granted the motion to confirm the award and denied Ortiz’s motion to vacate the award.

Michael Anthony Guzman appeals the judgment entered after a jury convicted him of inflicting corporal injury on a fellow parent (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)), cruelty to a child (§ 273a, subd. (b)), and resisting a peace officer in the performance of his duties (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)). In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true allegations that appellant had suffered a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (d) & (e), 1170.12, subds. (b) & (c)) and a prior domestic violence conviction (§ 273.5, subd. (f)(1)). The trial court sentenced him to eight years in state prison. Appellant raises claim of instructional and evidentiary error. He also contends the court erred in denying his Romero motion and that his sentence amounts to cruel and unusual punishment. We affirm.

Appellant Escape Bail Bonds (Escape) posted a $130,000 bond for Melikset Gasparyan who subsequently failed to appear. The trial court ordered his bail forfeited, and, after giving Escape an extension of the statutory deadline, denied Escape’s motion to exonerate the bond and entered summary judgment forfeiting it.

After defendant Averial Alexander pled no contest to possessing marijuana in prison in violation of Penal Code section 4573.6, California voters passed Proposition 64, which makes it legal, in most contexts, for adults 21 years of age or older to possess small amounts of marijuana. The trial court denied Alexander’s petition to dismiss his conviction under Health and Safety Code section 11361.8, finding Proposition 64 did not repeal or otherwise change the laws prohibiting the possession of marijuana in correctional facilities. In our original opinion, we reversed the court’s order denying Alexander’s petition, concluding Proposition 64 decriminalized possessing less than an ounce of marijuana in a correctional facility. (People v. Alexander (May 25, 2021, B305299) [nonpub. opn.].)

A jury acquitted David Daniel Rodriguez and Alonso Delgado of the first degree premeditated murder of Frankie Lopez, found both men guilty of second degree murder and also found true special allegations a principal had intentionally discharged a firearm causing Lopez’s death and the murder had been committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. Rodriguez and Delgado were each sentenced to state prison terms of 40 years to life. This court affirmed the convictions on direct appeal. (People v. Delgado (May 31, 2007, B187062) [nonpub. opn.].)

A jury convicted appellant Christopher Lee Boggs of unlawful possession of methamphetamine with intent to sell (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378; count 1), and transportation of a controlled substance (id., § 11379, subd. (a); count 2). It also found true the special allegation limiting probation eligibility if appellant possessed 28.5 grams or more of methamphetamine or 57 grams or more of a substance containing methamphetamine (Former Pen. Code, § 1203.073, subd. (b)(2)).

Elmer Campbell appealed from an order denying his petition to have his conviction for possessing marijuana in prison reduced or dismissed under the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (Proposition 64) (Voter Information Guide, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 8, 2016) Prop. 64, § 1, p. 178).

Dignity Health, doing business as French Hospital Medical Center (Hospital), appeals an order denying its anti-SLAPP motion (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16) to strike a physician’s cross-complaint for Health and Safety Code, section 1278.5 retaliation, intentional interference with prospective economic opportunity, and unlawful business practices (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17000 et seq.). The cross-complaint alleges that Hospital instituted a retaliatory peer review to pressure Troy I. Mounts, M.D. to resign after Mounts complained about hospital patient care. Hospital’s communications and reports with respect to the peer review allegedly interfered with Mounts’ ability to obtain staff privileges at other hospitals. The trial court denied the anti-SLAPP motion because it believed a retaliatory hospital peer review was not a protected activity within the meaning of the anti-SLAPP statute.