CA Unpub Decisions

Thorton David Withers appeals from a postjudgment order denying his motion to vacate the restitution and parole revocation fines imposed when he was sentenced as a third strike offender following his conviction for aggravated assault in 2002. No arguable issues were identified by Withers’s appointed appellate counsel after his review of the record. We also have identified no arguable issues after our own independent review of the record and analysis of the contentions presented by Withers in a supplemental brief. We affirm.

A jury found Sergio Jonathan Del Cid guilty of two counts of sexual intercourse or sodomy with a child 10 years or younger, four counts of lewd acts upon a child under the age of 14, three counts of using a minor for sex acts, one count of dissuading a witness, and one count of contempt of court. The victims are the four daughters of Del Cid’s girlfriend. They were approximately between the ages of six and 13 when the sex offenses occurred, on numerous occasions between 2015 and 2018.

Dwayne Maurice Jones was convicted following a jury trial of two counts of aggravated assault and several other felony and misdemeanor charges and sentenced to an aggregate state prison term of eight years four months. No arguable issues have been identified following review of the record by Jones’s appointed appellate counsel or our own independent review. We affirm.

In 2006 Lindsay Bohmwald, a native of Venezuela, pleaded no contest to grand theft of access card information, a violation of Penal Code section 484e, subdivision (d). Twelve years later, in 2018, Bohmwald filed a motion under section 1473.7 to vacate her conviction and withdraw her plea. Bohmwald argued her attorney in 2006 did not inform her of the immigration consequences of her plea, which “damage[ed] her ability to understand or defend against the adverse immigration consequences of her plea.”

A jury convicted Candido Rivera of murder and on other charges stemming from a police chase and collision in which Rivera crashed a stolen vehicle into a utility pole, killing his passenger. Rivera argues the trial court erred in admitting footage from body cameras worn by two police officers depicting post-collision events. Rivera contends the footage was irrelevant, more prejudicial than probative, and cumulative of other evidence. We affirm.

In this appeal from a disposition order in a juvenile wardship proceeding, appointed counsel for Jaylen W. filed a brief asking this court to independently review the record for arguable issues. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) We find no arguable issues requiring further briefing, but we correct a clerical error in the minute order from the June 2, 2020 plea hearing. In all other respects, we affirm.

In this dependency action, B.C. (Father) and S.G. (Mother) appeal following the juvenile court’s order terminating their parental rights over their daughter, L.C. (Minor). We affirm.

In this appeal, defendant Nicholas Earl Williams argues that the trial court violated the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution and article I, section 17 of the California Constitution by imposing and staying for 120 days various fines and fees when defendant was put on formal probation, while simultaneously determining that defendant did not have the present ability to pay under People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 (Dueñas). We affirm because defendant does not establish on appeal that the fines and fees were unconstitutionally excessive, but we find that a limited remand is appropriate to correct certain errors in the trial court’s sentencing minute order.

Following a joint trial before separate juries, defendant and appellant Armando Carranza (Appellant) and codefendant Abraham Arroyo (Arroyo) were found guilty of the August 2015 murder of Felix Garduno Vega (Garduno Vega). While the present appeal was pending, Appellant’s murder conviction was redesignated a conviction for assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)) and Appellant was resentenced.

Following a joint trial before separate juries, defendant and appellant Armando Carranza (Appellant) and codefendant Abraham Arroyo (Arroyo) were found guilty of the August 2015 murder of Felix Garduno Vega (Garduno Vega). While the present appeal was pending, Appellant’s murder conviction was redesignated a conviction for assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)) and Appellant was resentenced.

Following a joint trial before separate juries, defendant and appellant Armando Carranza (Appellant) and codefendant Abraham Arroyo (Arroyo) were found guilty of the August 2015 murder of Felix Garduno Vega (Garduno Vega). While the present appeal was pending, Appellant’s murder conviction was redesignated a conviction for assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)) and Appellant was resentenced.

Defendant and appellant Jose Maria Ayala, Jr., appeals from the trial court’s order denying his Penal Code section 1473.7 motion to vacate his guilty plea and conviction. He argues the trial court erred by denying the motion because when it denied the motion it improperly focused on the effectiveness of his counsel and failed to consider whether he meaningfully understood the adverse immigration consequences of his plea.

In a plea to the court, defendant and appellant James Edward Bryant pleaded guilty to two counts of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and one count of making a criminal threat (§ 422). He also admitted that he had suffered one prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (c) & (e)(1); 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)) and one prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)). In exchange, the trial court indicated a sentence of 10 years four months. The matter was thereafter continued for sentencing with defendant waiving his right to be sentenced by the court taking the plea pursuant to People v. Arbuckle (1978) 22 Cal.3d 749 (Arbuckle). When defendant appeared for sentencing, he requested the sentencing court strike the five-year prior serious felony conviction. After the sentencing court explained it had no ability to do so since the prior serious felony was part of defendant’s negotiated plea with the court, the sentencing court sentenced defendant to 10 years four months in state prison

On August 7, 2017, J.C. was shot following an altercation with several men. A jury convicted Fernando Hernandez (Hernandez) and Adrian Haro (Haro) of attempted murder arising out of this incident (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 187, subd. (a)). The jury also found true special allegations that defendants’ commission of the offense was willful, deliberate, and premeditated (§ 664, subd. (a)); a principal was armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)); and Hernandez personally used a firearm and personally and intentionally discharged a firearm in the commission of the offense (§ 12022.53, subds. (b), (c)).