CA Unpub Decisions

A jury convicted appellant of carjacking and first degree robbery while personally using a firearm with prison priors, and was sentenced to prison for 18 years. Court conclude that appellant has failed to establish a prima facie case in support of his habeas petition. Accordingly, court deny the petition.

Father of the minor, appeals from orders terminating his parental rights. Appellant contends he was denied due process by failure to provide him notice of hearings prior to the section 366.26 hearing at which his parental rights were terminated. Court affirm the orders of the juvenile court.

Appellants are children who were sexually molested by the minor son of Becky F., their family daycare home provider. In this action State Farm General Insurance Company (State Farm) obtained a declaration of no coverage for appellants' claim under a homeowners' insurance policy it issued to Becky F. The trial court's no coverage declaration is premised on two grounds: (1) an insurance policy exclusion for claims brought by persons in child care provided by the insured and (2) the prohibition of Insurance Code section 676.1, subdivision (c) for coverage for "for losses arising out of, or in connection with, the operation of a family day care home."
Appellant appeal contending the trial court erred in granting the declaratory relief in light of the doctrine of liability insurance policy coverage notwithstanding an applicable exclusion when there is multiple independent causation, as explained in State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Partridge (1973) 10 Cal.3d 94 (Partridge). Court affirm the judgment.

Plaintiffs were high bidders of $430,100 at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale of real property. However, after the auction and before issuance of a new deed, defendants, the trustee, set aside the sale because there had been a procedural irregularity in the auction. ILS had improperly disqualified a bidder. ILS held a new auction and sold the property to Realty Advisors for $615,000. Plaintiffs sued ILS, along with City National Bank (CNB), the beneficiary under the deed of trust, alleging numerous causes of action to obtain the benefit of the first sale. The trial court, however, granted summary judgment in favor of ILS and CNB. It found that setting aside the first sale was proper as a matter of law under the undisputed facts presented. Plaintiffs appeal. They contend that setting aside the first sale was not proper and that the second sale was void because it was made too soon after expiration of a temporary restraining order. court affirm.

These cases, consolidated for appeal, involve questions whether irrigation districts violated the California Environmental Quality Act by adopting negative declarations instead of preparing environmental impact reports (EIRs) for programs applying aquatic herbicides/pesticides to keep irrigation canals clear of weeds and algae. Environmental review of these long standing programs was newly triggered by permit requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to satisfy federal law (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. S 1251 et seq.).

Defendant was convicted, following a jury trial, of being a felon in possession of a firearm. On appeal, he contends (1) the trial court improperly excluded evidence that the man who was with appellant when he was arrested owned and possessed the gun in question; (2) the trial court improperly admitted "profile" evidence regarding drug dealing; (3) the cumulative effect of the court's errors requires reversal; and (4) the trial court incorrectly calculated appellant's presentence custody credit. Court order the custody calculation corrected to reflect an additional day of credit. Court otherwise affirm the judgment.

Plaintiff sued the attorney who represented her in a prior litigation, defendant (Kass), and his law firm, defendant Kass and Kass, for legal malpractice in connection with Kass's handling of the prior litigation. Kass responded with a special motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, contending that his conduct of the prior litigation constituted protected activity and that Walsh was unlikely to prevail in her malpractice action. The trial court denied the special motion, concluding that the conduct on which this malpractice action is based does not constitute protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute. Court agree and affirm.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant entered an open plea of guilty to first degree burglary (Pen. Code, S 459), and misdemeanor resisting arrest (Pen. Code, S 148, subd. (a)(1)); the court dismissed a charge of receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, S 496, subd. (a)), and a charge pending in another case of possession of a controlled substance for sale (Health and Saf. Code, S 11378) with a Harvey waiver (People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754). Defendant was sentenced on the burglary count to the upper term of six years in prison. Defendant contends that the judgment must be reversed because the court failed to state reasons for imposing the aggravated term. Court agree and remand for resentencing.

Defendant appeals from the judgment following his conviction for second degree murder.The People charged appellant with one count of murder and one count of vehicular manslaughter for Hattie Lauderdale's death. They also charged him with unlawful driving or taking of a vehicle, and leaving the scene of an accident in which someone was injured. Appellant contends multiple mistakes by the trial court denied him a fair trial. He complains particularly about some of the court's evidentiary rulings, especially those relating to gangs and opinion testimony by witnesses. Defendant also contends the court's misinstruction of the jury led jurors to mistakenly convict him of murder, instead of the crime of which he was guilty, vehicular manslaughter. Court affirm.

Business to Business Markets, Inc. appeals from the judgment following a jury verdict for Hoyla Insurance Group, Inc. Court affirm in part, and reverse and remand for retrial.

A psychiatrist, appeals from the judgment denying his petition for a writ of administrative mandamus, directed to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (Cedars) and the Medical Staff of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (medical staff), seeking to vacate the decision of Cedars's board of directors (Board) confirming the report and recommendation of the Board's appeal committee regarding Dr. Tolwin's medical disciplinary matter. Dr. Tolwin contends Cedars's peer review system violates California law and the original recommendation of the hearing committee to rescind his summary suspension, subsequently modified by the medical executive committee (MEC) and the Board's appeal committee, should be reinstated. Court affirm.

Appellant challenges the decision of the juvenile court sustaining a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition against him on the ground the trial court considered a dismissed charge in reaching its disposition. Court agree and remand for a new disposition hearing.

In 1988, Frank Kow, Michael Sun, and William Wang actively participated in a planned robbery and the shooting of three undercover DEA agents who were posing as drug buyers. Two of the agents were killed, the third was wounded, and Kow and Sun were killed by other agents as they attempted to flee. Wang was wounded but survived and was later convicted of two counts of first degree murder, one count of attempted murder, and one count of robbery, and was sentenced to state prison for life without the possibility of parole. Court affirmed (People v. Wang (June 3, 1992, B049641) [nonpub. opn.]), and the Supreme Court denied review (People v. Wang (Aug. 27, 1992, S027668).
At his retrial in 2005, Chia called Wang as defense witness, and Wang testified that Chia had not been involved in the robbery or murders of the DEA agents. The jury rejected Wang's testimony (and the rest of Chia's defense) and once again convicted him of two counts of first degree murder, one count of attempted murder, one count of robbery, and one count of conspiracy to commit robbery, with true findings on allegations that a principal had been armed with a firearm during the commission of the murders and the robbery. Chia was sentenced to state prison for an aggregate term of 61 years to life. He appeals, challenging various aspects of the trial and his sentence. Court vacate a $200 fine but otherwise affirm the judgment.

Appellant challenges his possession of marijuana for sale conviction on the ground the trial court erred by denying his suppression motion. Court agree.