CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant pleaded no contest to one felony count of possessing cocaine (Health and Saf. Code, S 11350, subd. (a)), and to four misdemeanors. He admitted one prior strike conviction. (Pen. Code, SS 667, subds. (b) (i), 1170.12.) Defendant's plea was conditioned upon his being sentenced to no more than 32 months in prison.
The trial court denied defendant's Romero motion and sentenced defendant to the agreed-upon maximum of 32 months in prison. In defendant's first appeal, this court reversed the judgment and remanded the matter with instructions to hold another Romero hearing. (People v. Thimmes (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 1207, 1213-1214 (Thimmes).)[3] On remand, the trial court again declined to strike defendant's prior conviction and reinstated the judgment.
Defendant appeals from the reinstated judgment. He claims the trial court committed reversible error in failing to order the preparation of a supplemental probation report before deciding whether to exercise its discretion to strike the prior conviction allegation. Court conclude that defendant has waived the claim.

Father is the father of Eva O., a dependent child of the juvenile court. Pursuant to California Rules of Court 8.452, (former rule 38.1), father filed a petition for extraordinary relief seeking review of the trial court's order terminating reunification services and setting a permanency planning hearing pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. Father contends the trial court erred in finding he had been provided or offered reasonable reunification services. Court conclude that the order setting the section 366.26 hearing is supported by substantial evidence, and therefore deny the petition.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of one count of attempted murder (Pen. Code, SS 187, subd. (a), 664), five counts of assault with a semiautomatic firearm (S 245, subd. (b)), three counts of attempted second degree robbery (SS 211, 664), one count of second degree robbery (S 211), and one count of possession of a firearm by a felon (S 12021, subd. (a)(1)). On appeal, appellant contends there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction of assault with a semiautomatic firearm against Alameda County Sheriff's Deputy Daniel Hemenway. Court affirm the lower court's judgment.

Plaintiffs appeal in propria persona from a judgment of the San Mateo County Superior Court entered in favor of defendant and respondent City of Redwood City (City), and from an order granting summary judgment in favor of defendant and respondent County of San Mateo (County), following the trial court's grant of defendants' motions for summary judgment. In their complaint, plaintiffs alleged that the City and the County improperly disclosed confidential information pertaining to their receipt of public assistance. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that Karen Jackson contacted the City's Fair Oaks Community Center (Center) for food and housing assistance, that following this contact the City contacted the County and Shelter Network, Inc., and that during these communications confidential information regarding plaintiffs was shared, invading plaintiffs' privacy in violation of Welfare and Institutions Code sections 10850 and 10850.2 and Civil Code section 1798.24.
On appeal, plaintiffs contend the court erred in granting summary judgment. Court affirm.

A modification decision.

Defendant appeals a judgment entered after he entered a plea of no contest to making criminal threats (Pen. Code, S 422) and first degree burglary (S 460, subd. (a)). On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the trial court's finding that he had suffered a prior serious felony conviction. Court affirm.

This appeal is from a judgment denying a petition for writ of mandate seeking to set aside a "Decision on Administrative Appeal" (Decision) made by John M. Rea, the acting director of the California Department of Industrial Relations (Director). Appellant, Southern California Labor/Management Operating Engineers Contract Compliance Committee (Southern), disputes the Director's Decision that certain work done under contract in the remediation of a toxic waste site pursuant to a consent decree (Consent Decree) obtained by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), is not subject to this state's Prevailing Wage Law[2] (PWL) because it is not a "public works" project as defined by the PWL. Court affirm.

Appellant appeals a judgment enforcing a settlement agreement pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. He claims on appeal that the settlement agreement is unenforceable under section 664.6 because it was not signed by all settling parties and that the parties did not comply with the terms of the agreement. Court disagree and affirm.

Defendant and appellant Neal G. Taylor ("Appellant") appeals the judgment imposed following his jury trial on assault and battery charges. Appellant's counsel has filed a Wende brief. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436). Court affirm.

Jim McKenzie filed a breach of contract and bad faith action against his insurer Scottsdale Insurance Company when Scottsdale failed to pay a claim arising from the burglary of his business. After a jury trial, judgment was entered in favor of McKenzie awarding compensatory and punitive damages. McKenzie appeals and Scottsdale cross-appeals. McKenzie claims the trial court prevented him from presenting evidence affecting punitive damages by failing to take judicial notice of documents obtained from the Internet, to enforce a notice to appear for trial, or to continue the trial. Scottsdale claims the policy was void due to a material misrepresentation, and that there was insufficient evidence to support findings of bad faith, oppression or fraud. Scottsdale also claims evidentiary error and error in the award of attorney fees. Court remand the case for a trial of the amount of recoverable attorney fees. Otherwise, court affirm.

Appellant appeals from a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of count 4, receiving stolen property, in violation of Penal Code section 496, subdivision (a). Appellant also appeals from a judgment of conviction entered after a mistrial and retrial on count 1, conspiracy to commit a bank robbery in violation of section 182, subdivision (a)(1) and section 211. Court affirm.

Defendant State Farm Fire and Casualty Company appeals from the order partially granting plaintiff Franciscan Hills Homeowners Association a new trial, which reinstated plaintiff's previously dismissed breach of contract claim for the alleged failure to pay benefits pursuant to an earthquake policy. Plaintiff cross appeals from those portions of the order denying its new trial motion as to other causes of action, as well as from orders sustaining demurrers to certain claims, and an order striking others. Court affirm the new trial order to the extent it granted plaintiff a new trial on its contract claim for unpaid insurance benefits. Court also reverse the order sustaining without leave to amend the demurrer to the second cause of action for breach of an alleged side agreement to reimburse the plaintiff expert witness fees, and the concomitant fourth cause of action, a common count based on that obligation. Finally, court reverse the order striking causes of action for fraud and bad faith.

A modification decision.

Appellant challenges the sentence imposed for his possession of cocaine base conviction on the ground the trial court violated his right to a jury trial by imposing the upper term. Court remand for resentencing because the trial court imposed an upper term on the basis of facts it, not the jury, found.