CA Unpub Decisions

Nathaniel L. Boothe appeals from the trial court’s denial of his petition for a judicial finding of factual innocence (Pen. Code, § 851.8), following his acquittal on charges of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)) and making a criminal threat (§ 422). Because we conclude from our independent review of the record that Boothe has failed to sustain his burden of establishing factual innocence, we affirm the trial court’s order.

Appointed counsel for defendant Victor Tatum asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Based on our review of the record, we will affirm defendant’s convictions but remand the matter to the trial court for recalculation of presentence credit.

Appointed counsel for defendant Alonzo Thomas has filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) After reviewing the entire record, we affirm.

In October 1988, defendant Laschell Genise Nelson pleaded no contest to murder, stipulating to the preliminary hearing transcript as the factual basis for her plea. In accordance with her plea, the trial court sentenced defendant to an indeterminate term of 15 years to life in state prison.
In September 2019, defendant filed a petition for resentencing under newly enacted Penal Code section 1170.95. The trial court found defendant ineligible for relief in a written order, entered without eliciting any response from the People or holding a hearing.

This is the second appeal in this legal malpractice action brought by Charles E. and Victoria Yeager (collectively Yeagers) against their former attorney Peter Holt, the Holt Law Firm, and Bethany Holt (collectively Holt). In the first appeal, we affirmed the trial court’s order denying Holt’s special motion to strike (also known as an anti-SLAPP--strategic lawsuit against public participation--motion (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16)).

Defendant Richard Harness challenges his commitment as a sexually violent predator (SVP). He argues the trial court erred when it admitted case-specific hearsay in two exhibits (exhibits 4 & 5) and expert testimony based on those documents, in violation of People v. Sanchez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 665 (Sanchez). We will affirm the judgment.

In this appeal, General Charles E. Yeager and Victoria Yeager challenge the dismissal of their action for legal malpractice against their former attorney, Michael Thomas, and Thomas & Associates, a limited liability law partnership. In the trial court, Victoria undertook to represent both herself and Charles even though she is not a licensed attorney. The Yeagers ignored repeated orders to secure a lawyer or guardian ad litem for Charles. Consequently, the trial court imposed monetary sanctions for abuse of the discovery process. After the Yeagers failed to comply with three discovery orders, the Thomas defendants brought a motion for terminating sanctions. The trial court granted the unopposed motion.

Joshua C. (father) appeals from the juvenile court’s informal supervision order issued after the court found he and Melissa G. (mother) medically neglected their infant daughter. On appeal, father argues insufficient evidence supports the court’s jurisdiction finding. We affirm.

Joshua C. (father) appeals from the juvenile court’s informal supervision order issued after the court found he and Melissa G. (mother) medically neglected their infant daughter. On appeal, father argues insufficient evidence supports the court’s jurisdiction finding. We affirm.

Christopher S. (Father) seeks extraordinary writ relief (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26, subd. (l); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452) from the juvenile court’s order made at the 18-month permanency review hearing terminating Father’s reunification services, denying return of his daughter Gennyfer S. to his care, and setting a selection and implementation hearing (§ 366.26). Father contends substantial evidence does not support the juvenile court’s order and the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department) failed to provide him with reasonable reunification services. Neither contention has merit. We deny the petition.

Plaintiff and appellant Jamalediin Emtiyaz (Jamal) appeals a judgment on a jury verdict in favor of defendants and respondents Mark Nezam Emtiaz (Mark), and Pacific World Trade, Inc., Pacific World Discovery, LLC, Pacific World Marine, LLC, Pacific World Properties, LLC, Pacific World Investments, LLC, and Pacific World Holdings, LLC (collectively the defendant companies).

Defendant and appellant Arthur Lee Lewis and co-defendant Eric Roberts were charged with the murder of Trevon Brown. (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a).) It was alleged that defendants personally used and/or discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury or death (§ 12022.53, subds. (b), (c), (d) & (e)(1)), in association with, or for the benefit of, a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subds. (b)(1) & (b)(5)).

Ivan V. Rubtsov appeals from the trial court’s post-judgment order after his former spouse Ulyana Rubtsova asked the court to modify the visitation order governing his visitation of their son and then-minor daughter, and Ivan’s responsive request to grant him joint custody of the children. Both parties represented themselves in the trial court and do so on appeal. Because the couple’s daughter reached the age of majority while this appeal was pending, Ivan’s appeal as to her is moot. We otherwise find no prejudicial error and affirm.

Bankers Insurance Company, through its agent Jail Out Bail Bonds, appeals from an order denying its motion to vacate the forfeiture of a bond Bankers posted to secure the release of Joel Ibarra Lara and the subsequent summary judgment. We affirm.