CA Unpub Decisions

Judith Jean Hoffman appeals from an order entered pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 17980.7, subdivision (c), appointing a receiver over her residential property and imposing an injunction to prevent her from maintaining substandard property. We conclude Hoffman forfeited her contentions on appeal, and they lack merit in any event. Because the trial court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.

Dominguez was convicted of one count of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211). The jury found the gang allegation (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)) to be true. Dominguez admitted one serious felony prior conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)); one strike prior (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)) and two prison priors (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).
The court sentenced Dominguez to a 16-year determinate term, consisting of the upper term of five years for robbery, doubled to 10 years based upon the strike prior. The court imposed a consecutive five-year term for the serious felony prior and a consecutive one-year term for one of the prison priors. The court stayed the term for one prison prior and stayed the 10-year term for the gang enhancement.

Appointed counsel for defendant Mal Blackburn has filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant filed a supplemental brief wherein he challenges the admission of his prior acts of domestic violence and argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel. We will affirm the judgment.

Defendant Juaquan Johnson and an accomplice attacked a former prostitute who worked for defendant while she was near her apartment in the middle of the night. The men beat her and dragged her through the apartment complex, stopping only after neighbors intervened. A jury found defendant guilty of pimping, kidnapping, domestic violence, and false imprisonment, but not guilty of brandishing a firearm on a separate occasion. He was sentenced to an aggregate term of six years four months in state prison.

Plaintiff Maureen LaPierre, in propia persona, purports to appeal from an order granting two separate special motions to strike pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.18 (the anti-SLAPPback statute), one by defendant Efrain Gonzalez, M.D., and another by defendant Low McKinley Baleria & Salenko, LLP (LMBS), a law firm representing Gonzalez in an underlying medical malpractice action. Following several years of litigation in the medical malpractice action and related bankruptcy proceedings, Gonzalez, through LMBS, commenced a separate action seeking a civil harassment restraining order against LaPierre under section 527.6. LaPierre prevailed on an anti-SLAPP motion to strike the civil harassment petition, and then filed a separate action against Gonzalez and LMBS (together, defendants), asserting causes of action for malicious prosecution, abuse of process and defamation.

Bill Brady appeals from the order, entered after a jury trial, granting the People’s petition under Penal Code section 2970, and requiring appellant to undergo continued involuntary treatment as a mentally disordered offender (MDO) at the State Department of Mental Health for a period of one year. We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After his examination of the record, counsel filed a brief in which no issues were raised. On November 28, 2018, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. (People v. Taylor (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 304.)

D.M. (Father) appeals juvenile court jurisdiction findings and disposition order concerning his son M.M. (Minor) pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 395. Father contends the juvenile court erred when it determined the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) satisfied its inquiry and notice obligations under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) and related California law in connection with A.M.’s (Mother’s) claim of Agua Caliente Indian heritage. Father, DCFS, and Minor have stipulated a limited remand to the juvenile court to permit proper compliance with ICWA and related California provisions. We accept the parties’ stipulation.

In March 2016, the juvenile court declared A.D. a ward of the court after it found true allegations that he committed assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)) and vandalism (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a)). The court ordered A.D. placed at home on probation for one year four months.

Nicole R. (mother) appeals from the juvenile court’s order under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 terminating her parental rights as to her daughter A.W. Mother claims the juvenile court and respondent Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) failed to investigate adequately her claim of possible Indian heritage, as required under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) and its corresponding provisions under California law (see § 224 et seq.). We agree with mother. DCFS failed to interview family members identified as potentially having relevant information, and did not inquire further as to certain specific claims made by mother. We conditionally reverse the juvenile court’s order and remand for the limited purpose of complying with ICWA.

Jesse Genaro Grijalva entered a negotiated plea of no contest on May 4, 2017 to six counts of assault on a peace officer with a semiautomatic firearm in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (d)(2), and admitted as to each count he had used a firearm within the meaning of Penal Code section 12022.53, subdivision (c).
The same day, in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement, the trial court sentenced Grijalva to 25 years in state prison: the lower term of five years on count 1 plus 20 years for the firearm-use enhancement. The court imposed concurrent five year terms on each of the remaining five counts of aggravated assault on a peace officer and stayed sentencing on the firearm-use enhancements. On the People’s motion the court dismissed count 7, carrying a concealed firearm (Pen. Code, § 25400, subd. (a)(2)). Grijalva did not pursue an appeal.

Michael Mohammad Sabzevar appeals a postjudgment order denying his request to recall his sentence pursuant to Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (d)(1) (1170(d)(1)), which permits recall within 120 days of the date of commitment. Appellant argues that the trial court abused its discretion because it did not comprehend the full scope of its discretion under section 1170(d)(1). We affirm.

Rosendo Enrique Lopez (true name Rigoberto Uribe Martinez) appeals from an order denying his motion to set aside his prior conviction and guilty plea based on the failure of defense counsel to advise him of the immigration consequences of his plea (Pen. Code, §§ 1016.5, 1473.7). We affirm.

Joshua Randall Imig appeals the trial court’s order denying his request to strike a three-year enhancement imposed under (now former) Health and Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (c) (section 11370.2(c)). Appellant made his request based on the recent amendments to section 11370.2(c) that went into effect on January 1, 2018. The court denied the request on the ground that the subject enhancement was imposed as part of an August 2016 judgment that became final before the new law went into effect. Appellant contends the court erred in concluding that that the amendments to section 11370.2(c) do not apply to final judgments. We affirm.

Anthony McCall (defendant) was convicted of first degree murder; kidnapping (§§ 207, subd. (a), 208, subd. (b)) (count 2); four counts of willful, deliberate, and premediated attempted murder (§§ 664, 187, subd. (a)) (counts 3 through 6); and attempted kidnapping (§§ 664, 207, subd. (a), 208, subd. (b)) (count 7). The jury found true that, as to counts 1 through 5, defendant discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)); as to counts 3 through 6, defendant inflicted great bodily injury on the victims (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)); and as to counts 6 and 7, defendant used a deadly and dangerous weapon (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)). The trial court sentenced defendant to 141 years and eight months to life imprisonment, and ordered him to pay restitution of $16,804.51 to the victims (§ 1202.4, subd. (f)) and a restitution fine of $10,000 (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)). We affirm defendant’s conviction and sentence.