CA Unpub Decisions

Gerry McLean Bailey was sentenced in 2003 to an aggregate state prison term of 44 years four months following his conviction on numerous counts of robbery and false imprisonment. In January 2018 Bailey moved to stay or strike the firearm enhancements included in his sentence under Penal Code section 12022.53, subdivision (b), pursuant to the recent amendment to section 12022.53, subdivision (h), which authorizes the trial court, in the interest of justice, to strike or dismiss an enhancement otherwise required to be imposed by section 12022.53. The trial court denied the motion. We affirm.

Police officers arrested Gabriel Alejandro Chavez after he attempted to sell them a stolen purse. The People charged Chavez with one count of receiving stolen property exceeding $950 in value (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)). The People alleged Chavez had suffered one prior violent or serious felony conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(j), 1170.12) and had served a separate prison term for a felony within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b).

Appellant Jack Jackson filed a motion, deemed a petition for habeas corpus, seeking relief under Proposition 36, also known as the Three Strikes Reform Act, and Proposition 57, also known as the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016. The trial court denied the petition to the extent it sought relief under Proposition 36, as it duplicated a 2012 petition that had been denied. To the extent the petition sought relief under Proposition 57, the court concluded it raised issues that were civil in nature, and transferred the matter to the civil division. We find no error in the court’s ruling to the extent appellant sought to relitigate issues under Proposition 36, but conclude the court mischaracterized the issues raised under Proposition 57, and remand the matter for determination by the criminal writs center.

At the conclusion of dependency proceedings in 2013, 10-year-old Kimberly G. was placed in a legal guardianship with her paternal grandmother, Alejandra E. Four years later, in 2017, the juvenile court terminated the legal guardianship and removed Kimberly from Alejandra’s care after Kimberly reported that Alejandra was physically and emotionally abusive. Alejandra appeals the order terminating the guardianship and removing Kimberly from her physical custody, urging that the juvenile court applied the wrong legal standards and the court’s findings were not supported by substantial evidence. We find no error, and thus we affirm.

Appellants Richard C. (Father) and Carmen G. (Mother) appeal the order denying Father’s petition for modification under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 and the order terminating parental rights under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. Appellants contend the court abused its discretion in concluding that his requested modification of prior court orders to provide additional reunification services was not in the best interest of their son, Anthony C., and in concluding that the beneficial parental relationship exception to terminating parental rights did not apply. Finding no abuse of discretion or other error, we affirm.

A jury found Sergio Ivan Deharo (Deharo) guilty of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211.) On appeal, Deharo contends that there was insufficient evidence to prove that the robbery was accomplished through force or fear. We are unpersuaded by Deharo’s arguments and, accordingly, affirm the judgment.

Defendant and appellant Carlos Cardoso pled no contest to unlawfully driving or taking a vehicle. The trial court sentenced him to a term of 28 months in prison. Cardoso appeals, contending the trial court abused its discretion by declining his request to recommend that he be placed in fire camp. Because Cardoso failed to obtain a certificate of probable cause and, in any event, his appeal is moot, we order it dismissed.

M.V. (father) and V.M. (mother) appeal from orders finding grounds for juvenile court jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b)(1) and removing their son M.V. and daughter Z.V. from their physical custody. Mother and father contend there is insufficient evidence that their substance abuse creates a substantial risk of serious physical harm to the children, and that the evidence does not support the finding that the Department of Children and Family Services (Department) made reasonable efforts to eliminate the need for removal. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the challenged findings and affirm the orders.

L.G. (father) appeals from the juvenile court’s disposition orders declaring his three children, C.G., T.G., and S.G., dependents of the court and removing them from their parents’ physical custody. Father argues: (1) the court abused its discretion when, without providing father prior notice, it amended the dependency petition at the jurisdiction hearing to allege father abused another drug, methamphetamine, while his children’s dependency case was pending; (2) insufficient evidence supports the court’s jurisdiction findings under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (a), (b), and (j); and (3) insufficient evidence supports the court’s order removing the children from father’s custody. Because the juvenile court has terminated jurisdiction over the children and returned them to their parents’ custody, we dismiss father’s appeal as moot.

On February 10, 2016, 5500 S. Freeway, LLC (5500 S. Freeway) filed an unlawful detainer complaint in the Los Angeles Superior Court for nonpayment of rent and return of possession against MGN Five Star Cinema, LLC (MGN) with regard to commercial property 5500 S. Freeway had leased to MGN. MGN filed an answer asserting a number of affirmative defenses to the allegations in the complaint and the case proceeded to trial on February 27, 2017. After a three-day trial, the court ruled in favor of 5500 S. Freeway and awarded it possession of the premises, past rent due, and additional payments and fees.

Touchstone Television Productions, LLC (Touchstone), hired Nicollette Sheridan to appear in the television series Desperate Housewives, a show created by Marc Cherry that aired on ABC. Sheridan sued Touchstone under Labor Code section 6310, alleging that Touchstone failed to renew her contract in retaliation for her complaint about a battery allegedly committed on her by Cherry. The trial court granted Touchstone’s motion for summary judgment and entered judgment in favor of Touchstone. We affirm.

Plaintiff and appellant Edik Ghadimian challenges the trial court’s (1) July 20, 2016, order granting defendant and respondent Geico Casualty Company’s (Geico) motion for relief from default, (2) January 3, 2017, order granting three of Geico’s discovery motions and imposing discovery sanctions against plaintiff, and (3) January 11, 2017, order granting Geico’s motion for summary judgment and January 31, 2017, judgment entered thereon.
We affirm the judgment and all orders.

The City of Los Angeles appeals from the declaratory judgment entered in favor of plaintiffs Los Angeles Police Protective League and United Firefighters of Los Angeles City after the trial court found that the City had agreed to guaranteed annual increases in the health insurance subsidies of the two groups’ retired members. The trial court determined that the extrinsic evidence offered by both parties was consistent with only the plaintiffs’ interpretation of the parties’ letter of agreement, which was reflected in the “plain meaning” of that agreement. We reverse and remand for a new trial because, contrary to the trial court’s findings, the agreement was ambiguous and the extrinsic evidence was in conflict. As a result, the trial court did not properly evaluate the extrinsic evidence when interpreting the agreement.

Appellants Nelson Lee and 1212 Albany, LLC challenge a judgment in the underlying consolidated actions determining that certain real property is a community property asset of Douglas Lee and respondent Jung Sook Lee. We reject their contentions and affirm.