CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant and appellant Carla Rose Collins challenges a number of her probationary terms and conditions, arguing they are unconstitutionally vague, overbroad, and violate the separation of powers and the rights to travel and association. The People agree that the condition requiring defendant to report contact with law enforcement should be modified, but argue defendant’s remaining claims are without merit. We agree with the parties that the condition requiring defendant to report contact with law enforcement must be modified and remand the matter to allow the trial court to modify the condition. We reject defendant’s remaining contentions and otherwise affirm the judgment.

Defendant and appellant Ronald Edward Potter challenges his conviction for felony intent to evade a police officer with willful and wanton disregard for the safety of persons and property (“felony reckless evading”), in violation of Vehicle Code section 2800.2. He argues that the prosecutor committed misconduct by mischaracterizing the law in closing argument, because the prosecutor represented that the law states that the jury “should” consider evidence of the defendant’s flight in determining his guilt, where the law states that such evidence “may show” defendant’s guilt. We find that this argument was forfeited by failing to object at the time so that the court could correct any misstatement. We are not in any event convinced that the prosecutor’s statements misstated the law. We therefore affirm.

Plaintiff and appellant Laura Bucki (Bucki) sued defendant and respondent City of Corona (the City) for premises liability. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the City. Bucki contends the trial court erred by granting summary judgment. We affirm the judgment.

A jury convicted defendant and appellant Byron Enrique Merida-Deleon on four counts involving the sexual abuse of a victim under the age of 10. During trial, a video recorded interview of the victim (Jane Doe, born in 2008) with the Riverside County Child Assessment Team (RCAT interview) was played for the jury. Defendant contends that the trial court erred by overruling his Evidence Code section 352 objection to the RCAT interview. He also contends that instructing the jury with CALCRIM No. 318, regarding prior statements as evidence, “compounded the error” of admitting the RCAT interview. We find no error and affirm the judgment.

A restaurant owner asked Burton, who was homeless, to leave the premises. In the altercation that followed, Burton stabbed the owner with a pocketknife. The owner subsequently suffered cardiac arrest and was rendered comatose. A jury convicted Burton of attempted voluntary manslaughter and assault and found true the allegations that Burton personally used a knife and personally caused great bodily injury. The trial court sentenced Burton to prison for a term of 14 years, six months.
On appeal, Burton contends the admission of evidence related to prior acts of misconduct under Evidence Code section 1101, subdivision (b) (section 1101(b)) constituted prejudicial error. We reject this contention and affirm the judgment.

Emma C. appeals orders denying a hearing on her petitions for modification under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 in her children's cases. She contends the juvenile court erred in finding that the petitions did not state a prima facie case of changed circumstances and that the modifications sought promoted the best interests of her children. We affirm the orders.

Robert Francis Baker, a 68-year-old man, followed a 12-year-old child who was walking alone on the side of a road, and repeatedly tried to persuade her to get inside his rental car. Baker was a registered sex offender who was previously sentenced to 20 years for seven counts of committing lewd acts on a child under the age of 14. Dildos, lubricants, and condoms were in his vehicle, and hundreds of images of child pornography were found on four of Baker's computers following a search of his residence.

Appellant American Claims Management, Inc. (ACM), a third party claims service administrator, entered into a contract to handle insurance claims on behalf of respondent QBE Insurance Corporation (QBE). ACM appeals a judgment entered after the superior court confirmed an arbitration award in QBE's favor. The arbitration panel (the Panel) concluded that ACM violated the parties' contract in handling a claim by a QBE auto insurance policy holder, Galdino Cortes, who was involved in a vehicular accident that injured three members of the Cardona family. The Panel awarded QBE total damages of $18,450,855.73, which included interest, attorney fees and costs.

A jury convicted codefendants Vernon Hill and Isaiah Woods of grand theft (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a); counts 1, 3 & 5), robbery (§ 211; count 2) and conspiracy to commit theft (§ 182, subd. (a)(1); count 6), stemming from incidents in which they and a third person stole electronics from retail stores. The court sentenced Woods to two years four months in prison, consisting of one year (one-third the midterm) for the count 2 robbery, plus eight months each for counts 3 and 5, all consecutive to a sentence Woods was already serving in Ventura County. It stayed under section 654 Woods's two-year sentences on counts 1 and 6. The court sentenced Hill to one year in prison for count 2 consecutive to a sentence Hill was serving for a crime committed in Ventura County, and concurrent two-year sentences for each of counts 3 and 5.

Plaintiff Martin Samo entered into purchase and sale agreements with defendant Somerset Holdings, LLC (Somerset) for the purchase of two parcels of real property in San Diego County.
One of the two parcels of land that Samo sought to purchase was subject to a lease agreement in favor of defendant Claydelle Healthcare, Inc. (Claydelle Healthcare). That lease agreement included a right of first refusal for the purchase of the property. The lease agreement required that Claydelle Healthcare be provided notice of any pending offer for the purchase of the property, so that it could exercise its right of first refusal to purchase the property.

Anthony B. Goss appeals the judgment on his conviction by jury of attempted residential burglary. (Pen. Code , §§ 664, 459, 460, subd. (a); all further statutory references are to this code unless noted.) Goss received a total term of 14 years in prison.
On appeal, Goss contends that insufficient evidence supports the conviction, because it was based on accomplice testimony but without independent corroborative evidence connecting him to the crime. (§ 1111 [evidence "tend[ing] to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense" required where accomplice testimony presented; People v. Romero and Self (2015) 62 Cal.4th 1, 32 (Romero) ["for the jury to rely on an accomplice's testimony about the circumstances of an offense, it must find evidence that ' "without aid from the accomplice's testimony, tend[s] to connect the defendant with the crime." ' "]; id. at p. 37.)

A jury convicted Antione Cisco and Reynaldo Eknar of robbery in concert, kidnapping for the purposes of extortion, and kidnapping for the purposes of robbery. The trial court sentenced each of them to a determinate term of 116 years 8 months and an indeterminate term of 63 years to life in prison.
Cisco and Eknar now contend (1) there is insufficient evidence of robbery in concert; (2) pursuant to Penal Code section 654 , their sentences for robbery in concert against two of the victims must be set aside, and most of their sentences for kidnapping for robbery must be stayed; and (3) we must remand to permit the trial court to exercise its new discretion regarding dismissal of the firearm enhancements.

This appeal arises from the dissolution of redevelopment agencies. The Department of Finance disallowed a $5.7 million transfer which a former redevelopment agency made to its sponsoring entity, the City of Fountain Valley. The City claimed the Department erred because the transfer was required and authorized by statute, and, as a result, the transfer was an “enforceable obligation” which the Department could not invalidate. The trial court disagreed with the City’s arguments, as do we. We affirm.

A jury found defendant Billy Thomas Wolfington Jr. guilty of second degree murder (Pen Code, § 187, subd. (a)—count one) and active participation in a criminal street gang The jury also found true that defendant personally used a deadly or dangerous weapon in the commission of these felonies. The jury found defendant not guilty of first degree murder and found not true that the murder was committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a criminal street gang with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in criminal conduct by gang members In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true that defendant was convicted in 2005 of violating section 186.22, and had three times previously served a prison term. The court granted defendant’s motion for a new trial as to count two only, which amounted to an acquittal on that count. The court denied defendant’s motion to strike or set aside the prior strike conviction.