CA Unpub Decisions

A jury convicted defendant of forcible sexual penetration with a foreign object and corporal injury on a former cohabitant. Defendant was sentenced to state prison for consecutive terms totaling four years. The abstract of judgment incorrectly shows four years four months and should be corrected.

A jury convicted defendant of commission of a forcible lewd act with a child under age 14 and found that he inflicted great bodily injury on the victim. The jury made special findings that defendant took advantage of a position of trust and committed the present offense while on bail. Defendant was sentenced to state prison for the upper term of eight years, plus five years for the enhancement. A concurrent term of two years was imposed for an unrelated case.

Defendant appeals his convictions for second degree murder and assault on a child with force likely to produce bodily injury. Appellant contends the court erred in not investigating whether jury misconduct had occurred, erred in denying disclosure of juror identifying information to allow him to investigate potential juror misconduct, and erred in admitting gruesome photographs into evidence. Court affirm.

plaintiffs are attempting to appeal an order entered by the trial court approving sale by the court appointed receiver of the receivership real property. The subject of the appeal is substantially identical to a prior appeal in which plaintiffs attempted to appeal an order giving the receiver authority to sell the receivership business and real property. Court granted the motion to dismiss the prior appeal and dismissed the petition for writ of supersedeas as moot. Court denied the motion for sanctions, but awarded costs to defendants.
In connection with the current appeal, plaintiffs filed a second petition for writ of supersedeas. As in the prior matter, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the appeal and requested sanctions and attorney fees.

Court review this case for a second time. A jury convicted defendantof multiple counts of assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest arising from two separate melees with law enforcement officers. Appellant was sentenced to an aggregate state prison term of 17 years.

A criminal law decision regarding resisting an executive officer. Court examined the entire record and are satisfied Appellant's attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issues exist.

Defendant appeals from the judgment entered following his no contest plea to first degree residential robbery for which he was sentenced to the lower state prison term of three years. On appeal, he contends the trial court abused its discretion by denying him probation. Court conclude the court did not abuse its discretion by sentencing him to state prison and affirm.

Defendant appeals from a judgment entered after a jury found her guilty of three counts of robbery and found firearm enhancement allegations to be true. Appellant contends her due process rights were violated because eyewitness identifications made at trial were tainted by an impermissibly suggestive field show up. Appellant also contends there was insufficient evidence identifying her as one of the persons who robbed the victims. Court reject each of her contentions.

The declarations page of an automobile insurance policy indicated a 30 day maximum benefit for rental car coverage. The insurance policy itself provided that the rental car benefit would be paid from the day the loss was reported through the day the insurance company made a settlement offer. Plaintiff insureds were in an automobile accident and reported the loss to defendant insurer. The insurer made a settlement offer, which terminated the rental car benefits prior to the expiration of 30 days. Plaintiffs were therefore required to pay the remainder of their rental car expenses. Plaintiffs brought suit, alleging breach of contract and fraud. They argued that the declarations page of the policy led them to reasonably expect a full 30 days of rental car coverage and that the provision in the policy terminating benefits upon a settlement offer was ineffective as it was not conspicuous, plain and clear. Alternatively, they argued that the declarations page and the limiting provision in the policy together created an ambiguity, which must be resolved in favor of coverage. The trial court sustained the insurer's demurrer without leave to amend. Court conclude that the policy provision regarding the termination of rental car benefits is conspicuous, plain and clear. Court also conclude that there is no ambiguity. Court therefore affirm.

Defendant was declared a ward of the juvenile court and ordered into the short term camp community placement program after the court sustained a petition alleging he had threatened a school official. Appellant contends there is insufficient evidence to support the finding he threatened a school official and one of his probation conditions is unconstitutional. Court affirm the order as modified.

Plaintiff seeks indemnity from defendants for attorney fees and costs it incurred in retaining independent counsel to defend it against an underlying action for personal injuries and wrongful death. On cross motions for summary judgment the trial court concluded no actual conflict existed between plaintiff and defendants or their insurer in the underlying action which would justify plaintiff's retention of independent counsel. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment for defendants. Court affirm.

A jury convicted appellant, of one count of possession of cocaine base for sale. Attached to this count were allegations appellant had suffered prior illegal drug related convictions. The jury also convicted appellant of the misdemeanor offense of unlawfully and falsely identifying herself to a police officer. Defendant appeals her convictions, claiming the trial court abused its discretion in failing to grant a continuance to secure the presence of a material defense witness and the court's instruction regarding the offense of falsely identifying oneself to a police officer was erroneous, confusing and prejudicial. Finally, appellant argues the court's order requiring her to reimburse the county $6,856.45 in attorney fees must be reversed because the court imposed its order without notice, hearing or findings and thus in violation of the statutory requirements for assessing her the cost of court-appointed legal representation. Court find, and the People agree, appellant's latter contention has merit. Accordingly, court vacate the order assessing attorney fees and remand to the trial court to conduct a noticed hearing on appellant's current ability to pay such fees consistent with the statutory mandates. Court affirm the judgment in all other respects.

A year before he died, decedent transferred several parcels of real property from his trust to defendants. After decedent's death, his wife, plaintiff, brought the present action to void the transfers, asserting that decedent was not competent to make them and that title was not transferred in the manner required by the trust. The trial court granted a nonsuit on the issue of decedent's competence; it subsequently denied plaintiff's motion for a directed verdict on the question of the method of transfer. Plaintiff appeals from the resulting judgment, and court affirm.

Defendant the presumed father, appeals from the lower court's denial of his petition pursuant to section 388 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. Appellant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his petition because he presented sufficient evidence that circumstances had changed and granting his section 388 petition would have been in child's best interest. Court affirm the lower court's ruling.