CA Unpub Decisions

Appointed counsel for defendant T.C. asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm.

Following a contested jurisdictional hearing, the Los Angeles County Juvenile Court found true that defendant and appellant R.B. (minor) committed two counts of attempted second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211/664). After it was determined minor’s mother resided in Victorville, the matter was transferred to the San Bernardino County Juvenile Court. The San Bernardino County Juvenile Court declared minor a ward of the court and placed minor on formal probation in the custody of his mother. Defendant appeals from the judgment. Based on our independent review of the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment.

A.G. (Father) is the presumed father of six-year-old J.Z. J.Z. was removed from parental custody due to C.Z.’s (Mother) chronic and unresolved substance abuse history and history with child protective services, and Father’s failure to protect him. At the time of J.Z.’s removal, Father lived in Texas. Following extended visits with Father, J.Z. was eventually placed with his half sister in a nonrelative family home. Father appeals from the juvenile court’s placement order, arguing the juvenile court failed to consider J.Z.’s placement with Father under Welfare and Institutions Code section 361.2. For the reasons explained below, we affirm the juvenile court’s placement order.

Juan Varela (Varela), Victoria Lee Dinger Main (Main), and Steven Bailey (Bailey), as individuals and on behalf of others similarly situated, sued Dolgen California, LLC (Dolgen), which operated Dollar General stores. Varela, Main, and Bailey (collectively, Plaintiffs) brought a class action alleging (1) violations of meal and rest break laws; (2) waiting time penalties; (3) wage statement penalties; (4) unfair business practices; and (5) violations under PAGA. Dolgen petitioned the trial court to compel arbitration. The trial court granted the petition in part and denied the petition in part. Dolgen contends the trial court erred by partially denying the petition. In particular, Dolgen asserts the trial court erred by finding putative class members had pending claims at the time they signed the arbitration agreement. We modify the order, but otherwise affirm.

Appellant, Randi W. (mother), appeals in propria persona from a judgment granting her former husband, respondent, Thomas C. (father), sole legal and physical custody of their son, H.C., and their daughter, Z.C. Mother contends that the trial court’s order was not in the children’s best interests. Mother also contends that the trial court relied on “false hearsay,” as well as inconsistent and biased information in the Evidence Code section 730 evaluation report (730 evaluation), which purportedly failed to comply with Family Code section 3118 and California Rules of Court, rule 5.220. Mother further contends that the trial court violated Family Code section 3027.5, subdivision (a), by denying her custody of the children without finding under Family Code section 3027.5, subdivision (b), that mother knowingly made false allegations of child sexual abuse against father, with the intent to interfere with his lawful contact with the children.

Defendant and appellant Donald Colin was upset when the manager of the Santa Cruz Inn (the Inn), Mageneran Govender, required a deposit in addition to the rate to rent a room for the night. Defendant left the Inn and went across the street, yelling at Govender, and the Inn’s maintenance man and security guard, Rene Rodriguez, that they were “fucking Muslims.” Govender yelled back and defendant approached them. Defendant stabbed Govender in the neck. Govender tried to punch defendant but was too weak. He got up to run away and defendant stabbed him in the back. Defendant then chased after Rodriguez and eventually stabbed him in the shoulder. Defendant testified that he never stabbed either of the two men and that Rodriguez hit him with a baseball bat.

Defendant Robert Alan Hubbard was convicted by jury of six offenses, all of a sexual nature, against minors. He was sentenced to a term of 85 years to life. On appeal, he challenges the entirety of his convictions based on the purported erroneous admission of evidence pursuant to Evidence Code section 1108. However, assuming error occurred, we nevertheless find no basis for reversal given the lack of potential prejudice. Next, Hubbard contends that one count in particular was not supported by sufficient evidence. Again, we disagree.
Hubbard's remaining claims on appeal all concern alleged sentencing and related errors. The bulk of them we reject. We remand, however, for consideration of the appropriate imposition of fines, as well as to order a minor correction of the abstract of judgment. In all other respects, we affirm.

M.S. filed a first amended complaint against her former teacher, Walter Solomon; her former principal, Scott Barton; her former vice-principal, Pete Selleck; her former school, The Preuss School UCSD (The Preuss School); and The Regents of the University of California (Regents). In the operative complaint, M.S. brought claims for negligence per se and battery against Solomon, both of which were premised on the allegation that Solomon sexually assaulted her. Specifically, M.S. alleged that Solomon digitally penetrated her while the two were parked in his car one evening. M.S. further alleged that Solomon knew, or should have known, that she was a minor and was thus legally incapable of consenting to inappropriate touching or sexual acts. M.S. also brought a claim for negligent supervision against respondents Regents, Barton and Selleck. M.S. contended that respondents' negligence had permitted Solomon to " 'groom' [M.S.] and take advantage of her youth and inexpe

A jury convicted defendant Regjuan Donnell Lindsey of false imprisonment, making criminal threats, unlawful possession of a firearm, and burglary. The trial court sentenced him to four years eight months in prison.
Defendant now contends the trial court had a sua sponte duty to give a unanimity instruction regarding the criminal threats charge. Finding no error, we will affirm the judgment.

A jury convicted Carlos Luis Videl of multiple felonies, including attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 664; count 1); carjacking (§ 215, subd. (a); count 2); attempted robbery (§§ 211, 664; count 3); and shooting at an occupied motor vehicle (§ 246; count 4). The jury also found true a firearm enhancement as to counts 1 through 3. (§ 12022.53, subd. (c).) Prior to trial, Videl pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a felon. (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1).) The court sentenced Videl to 87 years four months in prison, including determinate sentences for the first three counts and the guilty plea, firearm enhancements pursuant to section 12022.53, subdivision (c) and enhancements for prior felonies pursuant to section 667, subdivision (a).

Pursuant to a written plea agreement, defendant John Floyd Beebe, Jr., pleaded no contest to first degree residential burglary and admitted allegations of two prior prison terms and a prior serious felony conviction. After the trial court denied defendant’s Romero motion to dismiss allegations of seven prior strike convictions, it found the prior strike conviction allegations true and sentenced defendant to an aggregate prison term of 30 years to life.

In December 2010, the South San Joaquin Irrigation District (the District) closed a gate in a storm water drainage system it owned so it could make repairs. The closed gate caused storm water to flood and damage Cleo Johnson’s real property, as well as her personal property and the personal property of her son, Richard Johnson, and that of Richard’s fiancé, Jessica Marquez. We will collectively refer to the plaintiffs as Johnson unless it is necessary to be more specific.

A jury convicted Elliton Jay-Twan Varnado and Reshay Mott of the first degree murder of D. Lafazia, attempted robbery of Lafazia, and robbery of and assault with a firearm upon C. Carter and N. Ditaranto. The jury found true certain firearm enhancement allegations against Varnado and robbery-murder special-circumstance allegations against Varnado and Mott.

Mother appeals from the juvenile court’s findings and orders made under Welfare and Institutions Code section 362.4 on April 23, 2018. She contends the juvenile court abused its discretion when it terminated dependency jurisdiction over her 15-year-old daughter Emily, granted Father sole legal and physical custody of Emily, and placed “vague and unreasonable limits” on Mother’s visitation rights with Emily.
The juvenile court’s order that Mother’s visitation cannot be liberalized until after her completion of a psychological evaluation and services is reversed. All other orders are affirmed.