CA Unpub Decisions

A modification decision.

The sole issue in this appeal is the legality of the search of appellant. Court find no error and affirm.

Parents of Cristobal V., challenge the juvenile court order denying fathers Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 motion seeking to have Cristobal placed with his paternal grandmother in Mexico, and the order terminating parental rights and selecting adoption as his permanent plan. Court affirm the orders.

Defendant appeals from judgment entered after a jury convicted him of second degree robbery and possession of cocaine base. Court have examined the entire record and appellants contentions, and have not found any arguable issues. (Peoplev. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The judgment is affirmed.

The plaintiffs prevailed in this fraud action arising out of a failed real estate transaction. The defendants appeal, challenging the award of compensatory damages (on the ground that the plaintiffs failed to mitigate their damages), an award of attorneys fees (on the ground that the plaintiffs did not attempt to mediate the dispute before filing suit), and an award of punitive damages (claiming it is excessive). Court reverse the attorney fee award but otherwise affirm the judgment.

Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of manufacturing methamphetamine and possession of precursors with the intent to manufacture methamphetamine. (Health & Saf. Code, 11379.6, subd. (a), 11383, subd. (c)(1).) The trial court found defendant had sustained a prior controlled substance conviction. (Pen. Code, 1170.12; Health & Saf. Code, 11370.2.) The trial court found unusual circumstances and placed defendant on formal probation.
Six months later, defendant violated his probation by testing positive for methamphetamine. The trial court continued defendants probation and ordered defendant to complete the Well Ministry of Rescue program. Defendant, however, left the program without permission shortly before completing it. The trial court revoked defendants probation, released defendant on his own recognizance and ordered defendant to attend the Skyway House outpatient program and continue to comply with the previous terms of his probation.
At the May 3, 2005, disposition hearing on the probation violations, the court revoked probation and sentenced defendant to six years in state prison. The court then found that defendant had manufactured methamphetamine for personal use and was addicted to narcotics. The court suspended criminal proceedings and referred defendant to the California Rehabilitation Center (CRC).
Defendant signed a waiver form waiving his Welfare and Institutions Code section 3053 rights, including the right to appear in court should the CRC reject him for any legal reason. Defendant was subsequently excluded from the CRC. At a hearing with counsel, in the absence of defendant, the court vacated the civil commitment, reinstated the criminal proceedings and executed the previously suspended six-year state prison sentence.
On appeal, defendant contends the judgment must be reversed because he did not execute a valid waiver of his right to be present during any postexclusion criminal proceedings. He further argues that the waiver was not applicable because his exclusion from the CRC was not for a legal reason. Court affirm.

Defendant pled guilty to possessing methamphetamine. (Health & Saf. Code, 11377, subd. (a).) The court suspended the sentence and placed defendant on three years probation under Penal Code section 1210.1 (Proposition 36). Thereafter, the district attorney and probation department filed five petitions for revocation of probation, which defendant denied. Before the probation revocation hearing, the court denied defendants motion to proceed in propria persona. Thereafter, the court sustained the petitions, denied probation, and sentenced defendant to the middle term of two years in prison. Defendant appeals, arguing the court erred in denying his Faretta motion. Court affirm the judgment.

The sole issue raised in this appeal is defendants entitlement to custody credits for the days defendant participated in Butte Countys Sheriffs Work Alternative Program (SWAP). Defendant contends a remand is necessary for the trial court to determine his entitlement to credit for the time he spent in SWAP. Court disagree and affirm the judgment.

Defendant urges us to reverse his robbery conviction because the trial court instructed the jury in the language of CALCRIM No. 376 that only slight corroboration is necessary when the accused is found in possession of recently stolen property. The instruction, in defendants view, violates California case law, reduces the prosecutions burden of proof, and is tantamount to a directed verdict. Court disagree and affirm the judgment.

Pursuant to a negotiated settlement, defendant George Joe Currier pled guilty to welfare fraud (Welf. & Inst. Code, 10980, subd. (c)(2)) in exchange for the dismissal of other counts.
Imposition of sentence was suspended and defendant was granted probation for three years conditioned upon service of 360 days in county jail and payment of the following fines and/or fees: $100 fine plus penalty assessments; $200 fines in accordance with Penal Code sections 1202.4 and 1202.44; $6,987 in restitution plus an administrative fee; and $121 pursuant to Government Code section 29550.2.

A jury found defendant and appellant Agustin Hernandez Hernandez guilty of 15 counts of rape upon Leticia O. (Leticia) and Elizabeth O. (Elizabeth), children who were under 14 years old and 10 or more years younger than defendant. (Pen. Code, 269, subd. (a)(1).) The court imposed a total indeterminate term of 60 years to life.
On appeal, defendant argues that reversal is required because of the trial courts failure to instruct the jury that evidence of an admission should be viewed with caution. Court disagree and affirm.

Defendant (father) appeals from the juvenile courts order suspending its previous order of visitation in a therapeutic setting with his sons, J.D. and B.D. (the children). He claims that the court erred in suspending his visitation because the Department of Childrens Services (DCS) never complied with the courts previous visitation order, and because DCS failed to file a Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 petition to request a modification of the previous order. Father further contends that there was insufficient evidence to support the courts finding that visitation was detrimental to the children. Court affirm.

The father appeals from an order terminating parental rights to his now three year old son, Ricardo M., Jr. (Ricky). The father claims the juvenile court erred by failing to appoint counsel for him. He further claims the juvenile court erred by failing to provide him with reunification services and by finding that reasonable reunification services had been provided. Court hold that he forfeited both contentions by failing to raise them at the first opportunity below. Accordingly, Court affirm.

A jury convicted appellant Kurtis Armstrong of transportation of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, 11352, subd. (a); count 1), possession of cocaine base for purposes of sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11351.5; count 2) and sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, 11352, subd. (a); count 3). In a separate proceeding, the court found true allegations that appellant had suffered three strikes[1]and had served two separate prison terms for prior felony convictions ( 667.5, subd. (b)). The court imposed a prison term of 52 years to life, with the determinate portion of the term consisting of 25 years on each of counts 2 and 3, and one year on each of the two prior prison term enhancements. On count 1, the court imposed, and stayed pursuant to section 654, a term of 25 years to life.
On appeal, appellant contends (1) the court erred in admitting into evidence a photograph of appellant taken at the time of appellants arrest, and (2) the court abused its discretion in denying appellants request to strike two of appellants strikes. Court affirm.