CA Unpub Decisions

A jury convicted Guillermo Trujillo of two counts of caretaker theft from an elder (Pen. Code, § 368, subd. (e)(1)) (all statutory citations are to the Penal Code unless otherwise designated) and nine counts of money laundering (§ 186.10, subd. (a)). The jury also found that Trujillo engaged in aggravated white collar crime (§ 186.11, subd. (a)(1)(3)). The trial court sentenced him to five years in prison, which included two years for the aggravated white collar crime enhancement.
Trujillo challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for caretaker theft from an elder (count 2). Alternatively, he asserts he cannot be convicted for two counts of theft because he acted with a single intent and overarching scheme to steal. He also argues the aggravated white collar crime enhancement was not authorized, the trial court’s instructions on the enhancement were erroneous and prejudicial, the enhancement must be stricken because it was based in part on section 1

A jury convicted defendant Jorge Luis Ramirez of more than a dozen sex offenses he committed against his two young stepdaughters over a five-year period, as well as one count each of possessing child pornography and using a minor to record child pornography. A number of photographs recovered from his cell phone depicted one of his stepdaughters orally copulating an adult male. On appeal, he contends he is entitled to a new trial because the court instructed the jury it could consider his commission of certain charged offenses as proving he has a propensity to commit sex offenses. (See CALCRIM No. 1191.) We cannot agree. His arguments have previously been rejected by our Supreme Court in People v. Villatoro (2012) 54 Cal.4th 1152 (Villatoro). Additionally, we reject his further contentions that the trial court erred in instructing the jury with a modified version of CALCRIM No. 375 (evidence of uncharged offenses), and his sentence, which includes over 100 years in prison, constit

Armando Verdin pleaded no contest to possession of cocaine base while armed with a loaded firearm (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.1) and possession of cocaine base for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5). Verdin and codefendant Vanessa Cerda filed a suppression motion claiming the officers relied on illegally obtained information to support issuance of a search warrant and asked the trial court to traverse and quash the warrant. The court denied the motion to traverse and quash the warrant, but declined to rule on whether Verdin had been illegally detained and arrested. We issued an alternative writ directing the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing on Verdin and Cerda’s suppression motion.

A jury awarded $498,873.53 in compensatory damages to plaintiff Dane Rinehart on his claim against his former employer for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. The jury also awarded plaintiff $1 million in punitive damages. On appeal, defendant Bank Card Consultants, Inc., argues that (1) the wrongful termination jury instruction and the special verdict form given to the jury were incomplete because they did not require a finding of “but for” causation; (2) the trial court improperly instructed the jury to disregard plaintiff’s independent contractor agreement; (3) emotional distress damages were unavailable or alternatively excessive; and (4) the punitive damages award was excessive. We agree with defendant on the final point and modify the punitive damage award. We affirm the judgment as modified provided plaintiff consents to the modification. If plaintiff does not consent, we reverse the punitive damage award and remand for retrial on the issue of punitive

Appellant/defendant Craig Lamar Foster was charged and convicted of count 1, second degree murder of Janee Tatum (Pen. Code, § 187); and count 2, attempted murder of her husband, Herman Tatum, Jr. (§§ 664/187), with enhancements for personally and intentionally discharging a firearm causing great bodily injury or death (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)). Defendant also pleaded no contest to count 3, possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)).

An information filed on November 16, 2015, charged defendant Eduardo Solis Duque with one count of inflicting corporal injury on a person formerly in a dating relationship with the defendant (count 1; Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a).) The information also alleged that in the commission of the offense, he inflicted great bodily injury. (§ 12022.7, subd. (e).)
A jury convicted defendant and found the great bodily injury allegation true. The court sentenced defendant to seven years in prison (two years for the corporal injury conviction and five years for the great bodily injury enhancement.)

The People charged defendant Anthony Padilla with first degree murder after he stabbed Oscar Simental and Simental died from the wound. The jury convicted defendant of second degree murder. The court sentenced defendant to a minimum term of 30 years to a maximum term of life imprisonment, enhanced by seven additional years: one year for personal use of a deadly weapon, five years for a prior serious felony, and one year for a prior prison term.

Minor A. M. was detained, and later removed, from parental custody in December 2016 and placed in the foster care home of R. G. Appellant is R. G.’s daughter. Appellant lived with R. G. while R. G. was providing foster care to the minor. A year later, after reunification efforts had failed, Yuba County Health and Human Services Department (the Department) moved the minor from R. G.’s home. R. G. filed JV-180 request to change court order (petition for modification) on February 21, 2018, seeking to have the minor placed back in her care.
At the court hearing, appellant appeared with R. G., however, the Department argued, and the juvenile court agreed, that she lacked standing and only R. G., as the moving party, was permitted to participate in the proceeding. The juvenile court subsequently denied R. G.’s petition for modification. A single notice of appeal was signed and filed by both R. G. and appellant. R. G. subsequently dismissed her appeal. Appellant’s appeal r

Defendant Thanh Tran appeals a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of voluntary manslaughter (Pen. Code, § 192, subd. (a)) and being a felon in possession of a firearm (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)). Defendant argues insufficient evidence supports the jury’s conclusion his acts were the proximate cause of the victim’s death. The victim, who was not otherwise involved in the shooting, was killed by a single stray-bullet wound to the head while inside his apartment. Defendant points out that the evidence was not conclusive regarding who fired the fatal shot. We affirm.

Y.M., the mother of T.M., petitions for extraordinary relief pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.452. She seeks review of an order setting a permanent plan hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. Y.M. (mother) argues that the juvenile court erred in concluding that the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) provided reasonable reunification services to her because conjoint counseling and visitation in a therapeutic setting were never initiated. We deny the petition.

Defendant Jorge Onate filed a notice of appeal from his misdemeanor conviction of possessing methamphetamine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377.) His appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), disapproved on other grounds in In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 959, raising no issues. On October 19, 2018, defendant was notified of his right to file a supplemental brief and to request the court to have present counsel relieved if he so desires. Over 30 days have elapsed, and defendant has submitted nothing. We have reviewed the entire record, and finding no arguable issues, affirm the judgment.

A jury convicted Sosaia Kanandale Sekona of first degree premeditated murder following a shooting outside a restaurant in Inglewood. The jury also found true the allegations Sekona committed the crime to benefit a criminal street gang and personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing death (Pen. Code, § 12022.53, subd. (d)). The trial court found Sekona had suffered a prior serious or violent felony conviction. The court sentenced Sekona to a state prison term of 75 years to life, consisting of 25 years to life, doubled under the three strikes law, plus 25 years to life for the firearm enhancement. The court stayed imposition of the sentence for the gang enhancement. (People v. Sekona (Jan. 29, 2018, B272444) [nonpub. opn.].)
In Sekona’s initial appeal we vacated the sentence and remanded for a new trial on the gang allegation. We directed the trial court as follows: “If the jury finds the gang allegation true, the trial court is to impose the enhancement under

E.P. (Mother) appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to M.F. (born in 2011) arguing that the dependency court erred in finding the parent-child relationship exception and the sibling relationship exception to termination of parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26, subds. (c)(1)(B)(i) & (c)(1)(B)(v)) did not apply. We disagree and affirm.

The juvenile court asserted jurisdiction over R.V. and made various dispositional orders. R.V.’s father (Father) contends the court and the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) failed to comply with the requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.). We affirm the dispositional orders and remand the matter for the juvenile court and DCFS to comply with ICWA.