CA Unpub Decisions

Appellant, Jose Manuel Guigosa, was convicted after a jury trial of second degree burglary of a vehicle (Pen. Code, 459, count one) and receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, 496, subd. (a), count two). On June 14, 2006, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on probation upon various terms and conditions. On appeal, appellant contends the trial court erred in admitting into evidence appellants possession of other items that were not related to the allegations. Appellant also claims prosecutorial misconduct.
The judgment is affirmed.

A jury convicted Raymond Avila of three counts of carjacking (counts 4, 5 and 6/Pen. Code, 215, subd. (a)) and one count of attempted kidnapping (count 7/Pen. Code, 664/207). On June 13, 2006, the court sentenced Avila to an aggregate term of nine years two months as follows: the midterm of five years on count four, consecutive sentences of one year eight months on counts five and six and a consecutive ten months on count 7. On appeal, Avila contends the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction on the carjacking offense he was convicted of in count 6. Court affirm.

Petitioner in pro. per. seeks an extraordinary writ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.450-8.452) to vacate the order of the juvenile court issued at a post permanency plan review hearing setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing at to her son H.B. Court deny the petition.

On July 7, 2005, the Santa Cruz County District Attorney filed an amended information in case number F09677 charging appellant with various offenses occurring on different dates. Counts one through seven were alleged to have occurred on January 15, 2005. Count one charged battery with injury on a police officer (Pen. Code, 243, subd. (a)(2)); count two, resisting a police officer with serious bodily injury (Pen. Code, 148.10); count three, possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, 11377, subd. (a)); count four, resisting a police officer (Pen. Code, 148, subd. (a)(1)); count five, driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol (Veh. Code, 23152, subd. (a)); count six, driving with a blood alcohol level of .08 (Veh. Code, 23152, subd. (b)); and count seven, driving with a suspended license (Veh. Code, 14601.2 subd. (a)). As to counts one through three, the information alleged that at the time of the commission of the offenses appellant was released from custody within the meaning of Penal Code section 12022.1.
Since Court have concluded that there appears to be a substantial likelihood of juror bias, appellant was deprived of his right to a unanimous verdict of 12 impartial jurors. Thus, the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial. (Nesler, supra, 16 Cal.4th at p. 590.)
Given that the judgment reversed, it is not necessary to address appellant's remaining contentions.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of two counts of corporal injury of a child, and one count of assault causing the death of a child under the age of eight. On this appeal, he contends that: (1) the trial court erred in admitting evidence of his objections to a police search of his home; (2) the trial court should have given a unanimity instruction on the count of assault causing death; (3) a juror should not have been discharged during deliberations; and (4) his sentence of 60 years 4 months to life in prison constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Court agree that the evidence of appellants objections to the search should not have been admitted, but find the error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Court reject appellants other contentions, and affirm the conviction and sentence.

A modification decision.

Defendant Eugene Coates appeals from a judgment convicting him of selling cocaine and sentencing him to three years in prison. He contends the trial court erred in denying his many motions for appointment of a new attorney under People v. Marsden(1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden). He also contends the trial court erroneously determined that he was ineligible for probation. Court affirm.

Richard Teel sued his former employer and supervisor for age discrimination, harassment, and other claims arising from his termination from employment in 2003. He appeals from a summary judgment in favor of the defendants, contending that there are triable issues of fact as to whether the defendants proffered reasons for discharging him were merely a pretext for discriminatory motives. Court find no triable issues, and affirm the judgment.

Plaintiff and appellant Firemans Fund Insurance Companies had a judgment of dismissal entered against it after the trial court granted respondent George C. McColms motion to dismiss for failure to bring the action to trial within five years, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 583.360.[1]Appellant filed a notice of appeal against the judgment of dismissal in May 2005, and this court dismissed the appeal in December 2005 for failure to procure the record pursuant to former California Rules of Court, rule 8(b) (currently rule 8.140). While this appeal of the judgment of dismissal was pending, the trial court set aside the judgment of dismissal pursuant to appellants motion under section 473, subdivision (b). Respondent then filed a motion to vacate that order. After a hearing on the matter, the trial court granted respondents motion to vacate its prior order setting aside the judgment of dismissal. However, the trial court did not rule on, or notice further hearing on, appellants section 473 motion. Firemans Fund now appeals the order reinstating the judgment. As explained more fully below, Court affirm the judgment on a ground different from that relied on by the trial court, namely, the trial court was without jurisdiction to hear appellants section 473 motion while the first appeal was pending. ( 916).

Defendant Fraisure E. Smith appeals the presentence local custody credits awarded him after he pled no contest to assault with intent to commit rape (Pen. Code, 220), and admitted a prior strike ( 1170.12), and a prior prison term ( 667.5, subd. (b).) He contends the trial court breached his plea agreement by limiting his presentence conduct credits to 15 percent of the actual time he spent in local custody prior to entering his plea. Court disagree and affirm.

A modification decision.

Appellants Charles A. Pappas (Pappas) and Charles M. Shields III, Trustee of Georgia Pappas Family Revocable Trust (Trust), cross-defendants below, appeal from a trial court judgment after bench trial awarding defendant Jerry Muellner damages of $77,813.80 and foreclosure rights, contending there was a failure of consideration for the obligation enforced by the court, and no basis for the award of interest in any event. Court affirm in part and reverse in part.

Defendant Guillermo Leon Zamora appeals from a consolidated judgment entered in three cases imposing an aggregate five-year four-month sentence upon pleas of guilty and no contest. Defendants attorney has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, requesting our independent review of the record, and the court has received supplemental briefing on the issue of custody credits. Court find no arguable issue and affirm.

The trial court committed Dana Ruth Swenson to Patton State Hospital (Patton) after finding her mentally incompetent to stand trial on several charges. She seeks review of an order authorizing involuntary administration of antipsychotic medication during her commitment, contending there is insufficient evidence to support certain findings that are necessary prerequisites to the order. As explained below, Court conclude there is sufficient evidence to support the findings as to one of three statutory conditions, and on that basis affirm the order.