CA Unpub Decisions

Francisco H. appeals from the order continuing wardship entered following true findings on a petition alleging residential burglary, grand theft of an automobile, unlawful taking of a vehicle, and receiving stolen property. He contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the finding of burglary. Court affirm.

An employee requested and received a leave of absence for a medical condition related to her pregnancy. An extension was granted at her request, but she then failed to return at the end of the extended leave and (in accordance with the companys policies) her employment was terminated. She sued her employer for denial of pregnancy leave. The employer moved for summary judgment and won. Court affirm.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction entered after a court trial during which the court found him guilty of two counts of misdemeanor sexual battery (Pen. Code, 243.4, subd. (e)(1); counts 1 & 2), one count of sexual penetration by a foreign object (id., 289, subd. (a)(1); count 3) and one count of forcible oral copulation (id., 288a, subd. (c)(2); count 4) against L.W., and two counts of misdemeanor sexual battery against K.R. (id., 243.4, subd. (e)(1); counts 5 & 6). Court affirm.

Marcellus Davis, Jr. sued L & R Automotive Supply Co. in small claims court and lost at a hearing presided over by a temporary judge. Davis complained to the supervising judge that the temporary judge was biased against him because of his race and mental disability. The complaint was referred to the Los Angeles County Superior Courts Temporary Judges Committee, which reviewed the record of the small claims proceedings, found no evidence of bias or unfairness, and (by letter from Comr. Douglas G. Carnahan) so advised Davis. Dissatisfied, Davis complained to the presiding judge (Hon. William A. MacLaughlin), who referred the matter to the assistant presiding judge (Hon. Stephen J. Czuleger), who reviewed the entire file, then wrote to Davis to tell him his claims were without merit and the case had been closed.

Davis then filed a pro se complaint against the judge pro tem, the commissioner, and the supervising, presiding and assistant presiding judges, alleging a conspiracy to deny his constitutional right to due process that caused him to suffer emotional distress. The judicial officers demurred on the ground of judicial immunity and the demurrer was sustained without leave to amend. Davis appeals. The judgment is affirmed.

Joseph R. appeals from the order of wardship entered following a finding that he committed misdemeanor vandalism. He contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the finding. Court affirm.

A mothers parental rights were terminated and the childs father was granted legal and physical custody, with monitored visits for the mother. The mother appeals. Court affirm.

Defendant Damon Louis Matheus appeals from the judgment entered after the trial court found him guilty of evading a police officer (Veh. Code, 2800.2, subd. (a)) and found true the allegations of three prior prison terms (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b)) and five prior convictions qualifying as strikes ( 667, subds. (b)(i); 1170.12). The court imposed a sentence of 25 years to life, and ordered the sentence on the prior prison term allegations to be stricken. The judgment is affirmed.

We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this matter. After examining the record counsel filed a Wende brief raising no issues on appeal and requesting that we independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellants attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (Id. at p. 441.) We set out below a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case, the crimes of which the defendant was convicted, the punishment imposed, defendants contention of appeal and why it fails. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110.) Court find no basis for overturning the courts finding. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Van Steven Muse was convicted of one count each of commercial burglary (count 1), petty theft with a prior based on an admitted 2004 grand theft conviction (count 2), assault (count 3), and battery (count 4). (Pen. Code, 459, 666, 240, 242.) He was sentenced to state prison for a term of three years. Muse appeals, contending there were instructional and sentencing errors. Court affirm.

Steven Sevillano was convicted of one count of making a criminal threat (count 1), one count of attempted premeditated murder (count 3), and one count of inflicting corporal injury on a spouse (count 4), with true findings on allegations that he was on bail at the time of the count 3 and 4 offenses, that he personally used a knife and inflicted great bodily injury in the commission of the crimes charged in counts 3 and 4, and that he had suffered one prior conviction that qualified as a strike and as a serious felony. (Pen. Code, 422, 664, 187, subd. (a), 273.5, subd. (a), 12022.1, 12022, subd. (b)(1), 12022.7, subd. (e), 667, subds. (a)(1), (b)-(i).) He was sentenced to state prison for a term of 26 years to life. Sevillano appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the criminal threat count. Court affirm.

In a felony complaint, the People charged defendant Mario Miramontes Medina with kidnapping for child molesting (Pen. Code, 207, subd. (b); count 1) and committing a lewd act upon a child under the age of 14 (id., 288, subd. (a); count 2). Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, defendant pled guilty to count 2, and the trial court sentenced him to the low term of three years in state prison and dismissed count 1. Court have examined the entire record and are satisfied that defendants counsel has complied fully with his responsibilities. No arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 119; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.) The order is affirmed.

Defendant John V. Bowler appeals from a judgment convicting him of possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code 11377, subd. (a); undesignated section references are to the Health & Safety Code) following entry of a no contest plea. On appeal, defendant contends his suppression motion was wrongly denied and that the alcohol use condition of his probation was wrongly imposed. Court reverse and remand.

Dorothy King, the surviving spouse of Clyde King, appeals from an order that found she was not entitled to a distributive share of a trust through Clyde because he did not survive distribution as required by the trust. (Prob. Code, 1304, subd. (a).) Court affirm.

A modification decision.