CA Unpub Decisions

The People charged Tony Clifton McDade with unlawful driving or taking a vehicle, in violation of Vehicle Code section 10851, subdivision (a), and alleged he had two prior felony convictions, one for the same offense and one for carjacking. At trial McDade admitted the prior conviction allegations, and the court found them true. The jury convicted McDade, and the court sentenced him to a prison term of six years eight months.

S.V. was found to be gravely disabled following a court trial under the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act. (See Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5000 et seq.; all statutory references are to the Welf. & Inst. Code.) The court appointed the Contra Costa County Public Guardian as his conservator and determined that his current placement in a locked facility was the least restrictive and most appropriate placement. S.V. raises two arguments in this appeal: first, that the court violated his equal protection rights by compelling him to testify in his commitment trial, and second, that his trial was delayed without good cause and in violation of statutory time limits.

S.V. was found to be gravely disabled following a court trial under the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act. (See Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5000 et seq.; all statutory references are to the Welf. & Inst. Code.) The court appointed the Contra Costa County Public Guardian as his conservator and determined that his current placement in a locked facility was the least restrictive and most appropriate placement. S.V. raises two arguments in this appeal: first, that the court violated his equal protection rights by compelling him to testify in his commitment trial, and second, that his trial was delayed without good cause and in violation of statutory time limits.

Osiris Lenin Garfias Pedraza appeals from the judgment following his conviction of first degree murder. The jury found he personally used a firearm to cause his victim’s death. The court sentenced him to an indeterminate term of life without the possibility of parole, plus a consecutive term of 25 years to life for his personal use of a firearm.

James Eugene Carrera got into a physical altercation with two people. The jury convicted him of assault with a deadly weapon and simple assault as to the first victim, and misdemeanor battery and simple assault as to the second victim. The trial court sentenced Carrera to a four-year prison term and imposed various fines, fees, and assessments. In his appeal, Carrera asserts (1) there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions for assault with a deadly weapon against the first victim, (2) the simple assault committed against the second victim must be dismissed because it is a lesser included offense of battery, and (3) the case must be remanded for a hearing on his ability to pay the restitution fine and assessments.

A jury convicted Alatini Moli of first degree robbery (count 1; Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (a)), first degree burglary (count 2; §§ 459, 460, subd. (a)), and kidnapping during the commission of a robbery (count 4; § 209, subd. (b)). The jury also found true an enhancement allegation that a nonaccomplice was present during the burglary. (§ 667.5, subd. (c)(21).) Observing that Moli had committed two previous armed robberies, including one for which he had recently been released from court supervision after turning 18 years old, the trial court sentenced Moli to the upper term of six years in prison on the robbery count. The court stayed the sentence on count 2 pursuant to section 654, and imposed the life term with the possibility of parole prescribed for count 4, to be served consecutive to his determinate term.

Appellant Carlos Lopez Urias was charged with one count of murder and faced a possible sentence of 56 years to life. Two weeks after the complaint was filed, Urias expressed a desire to plead guilty to the charge and admit all special allegations in exchange for the maximum possible sentence. The court accepted his plea and at the sentencing hearing imposed a 56-years-to-life term.

Appellant and defendant Masayoshi Mukai admitted he had consumed “ ‘unknown’ amounts” from a “ ‘pile’ of drugs” on the night before and morning of December 26, 2017, and then drove to Fresno with a friend, 20-year-old Maya Isabel Thone (Ms. Thone). While on State Route 152, he drove in excess of 100 miles per hour, weaved in and out of traffic, and his vehicle overturned. Ms. Thone was pronounced dead at the scene. Defendant tested positive for methamphetamine, cocaine, and opiates.

Effective January 1, 2019, Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) amended Penal Code sections 188 and 189 (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, §§ 2, 3) to limit the application of the felony-murder rule and the crime of murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine to ensure that murder liability is not imposed on a person who is not the actual killer, did not act with the intent to kill, or was not a major participant in the underlying felony who acted with reckless indifference to human life.

Defendant and appellant A.P. (mother) challenges a juvenile court’s order denying her reunification services pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 361.5, subdivision (b)(10) and (b)(11), as to her son, B.F. (the child). She contends that the court erred in denying her services since there was insufficient evidence to identify the issues that led to the removal of the child’s siblings and to show that she did not make reasonable efforts to treat the problems that had led to their removal. We affirm.

Defendant and appellant, Isaiah Davilon Lee Howard, filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.95 (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 4), which the trial court dismissed. Defendant contends the court erred in dismissing his petition on the grounds that section 1170.95 does not apply to those convicted of attempted murder. We affirm.

Defendant and appellant Lillian Ann Johnson appeals from an order of the San Bernardino County Superior Court summarily denying her motion for resentencing made pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.95. We reverse and remand.

On appeal, James argues that the trial court erred by (1) sustaining certain evidentiary objections, (2) not allowing James to present evidence that he suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to demonstrate the objective reasonableness element of his self-defense claim, and (3) allowing a law enforcement officer to opine that one of the victim’s friends was not involved in the shooting. James further argues that the prosecutor’s question eliciting the law enforcement officer’s opinion constituted misconduct. James contends that these errors were cumulatively prejudicial. We conclude that James has not shown prejudicial error, and we therefore affirm the judgment.

In March 2007, a jury convicted Julie Lynn Spencer of second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)); robbery with the use of a knife (§§ 211, 12022, subd. (b)(1)); attempted arson (§§ 664 & 451, subd. (a)); cruelty to an adult with great bodily injury (§§ 368, subd. (b)(1) & 12022.7, subd. (c)); caretaker theft (§ 368, subd. (e)); false imprisonment of a dependent adult (§ 368, subd. (f)); and two counts of forgery (§ 470, subd. (d)). Spencer was sentenced to an indeterminate term of 15 years to life plus two years in prison.