CA Unpub Decisions

A minor was declared a ward of the juvenile court after the court sustained a petition alleging appellant had resisted, obstructed and delayed a peace officer. On appeal minor contends there is insufficient evidence that he had the requisite understanding of wrongfulness necessary to find a child under the age of 14 capable of committing a criminal offense. Court affirms.

Plaintiff underwent surgery to remove a tumor on her spine. Afterward, plaintiff could not walk, a common side effect of the surgery. The doctor told plaintiff she was fine, and with physical therapy, plaintiff would walk again. Plaintiff had a second surgery to correct a problem, a spinal leak, caused by the first surgery. Still, plaintiff could not walk. She was told again that she was doing well and that physical therapy would enable her to walk. After several months of physical therapy with no signs of improvement, plaintiff filed this action against a county medical center and her doctors, alleging medical malpractice. Trial court ruled the action was barred by the statute of limitations. Court reversed judment because a reasonable person would not have suspected wrongdoing.

Plaintiff appeals a judgment after the trial court granted a motion for a nonsuit made by defendants on his causes of action for negligence, trespass, nuisance and emotional distress. Court concludes that appellant failed to introduce sufficient evidence to prove his causes of action. Court affirms.

Appellant appeal from the trial court's judgment confirming an arbitration award in favor of respondent. Court affirms.

A decision regarding a complaint for fraud, fraudulent concealment, breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff appeals from an order to dismiss. Order reversed and remanded for the causes of action for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. All other orders overruled.

Appellant appeals his conviction of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 664)[1] and shooting at an occupied motor vehicle (§ 246) with findings that he personally used a firearm to commit these crimes (§§ 12022.5, subd. (a)(1), 12022.53, subds. (b)-(c)) and committed the offenses for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). The Court concludes that 1) the prosecutor did not engage in misconduct by cross-examination of a witness or by her arguments to the jury, 2) Appellant did not shown that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, and 3) the court did not err by denying Appellant a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

A decision regarding medical malpractice action, and alleging negligence in diagnosis, treatment, and care. Plaintiff complains about evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and the verdict form. Plaintiff did not adequately explain. Judgment affirmed.

A decision regarding conviction for one count of vehicular manslaughter and one count of leaving the scene of an accident. Defendant appeals. He claims his Wheeler motion and his motions to dismiss and reopen for judgment of acquittal, and for a new trial should have been granted. He contends there were evidentiary and instructional errors. Court affirmed the judgment.

A criminal law decision regarding possession of methamphetamine with a prior serious or violent felony within the meaning of Penal Code. Defendant appeals on the grounds that the trial court committed instructional error. Judgment affirmed.

A decision regarding convictions for assault with intent to commit rape and sexual penetration by a foreign object. Appellant claims that the trial court erred by improperly commenting on the evidence, denying his motion for new trial, failing to dismiss the sexual penetration conviction as an included offense of the assault, conducting a jury trial of sentencing factors, instructional error, section 654 error, error in ordering a sex offender fine (§ 290.3) and reimbursement of medical examination costs (§ 1203.1h). Judgment modified to impose new fines, and strike §1203.1h. Remanded to verify Appellant's ability to pay fines. Otherwise, judgment affirmed.

Respondent sued their professional adoption facilitator, after learning that the putative birthmother they met through defendant had faked her pregnancy and defrauded them out of several thousand dollars. Respondent eventually voluntarily dismissed their suit against appellant whereupon appellant moved for an award of attorney fees as the prevailing party under Family Code section 8635. The trial court denied the motion, finding that neither side was a prevailing party for purposes of that section. On appeal, Appellant contends that she is entitled to fees as a matter of law. Court affirm the trial court's ruling denying a fee award.

A decision regarding an appeals from a judgment enforcing an arbitration award. Appellant challenged the arbitrator’s award on various grounds, including: that the arbitrator failed to disclose information indicating a bias, that the parties had not agreed to an arbitration that would be binding, and that the award of statutory penalties exceeded the arbitrator’s authority. Arguments rejected. Judgment affirmed.

The juvenile court terminated the parental rights of appellant to his daughter. Appellant contended that (1) he received insufficient notice of the permanency planning hearing; (2) the juvenile court erred by holding the hearing in his absence; and (3) the court erred by failing to conduct a Marsden-type hearing after he requested new appointed counsel. Corbin cannot show detriment because there is no evidence that the minor might benefit from a continuing relationship with him. The order terminating parental rights is affirmed.

Defendant appeals a judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of attempted murder. The jury also found that the crime was committed willfully, deliberately, and with premeditation, that defendant used a deadly or dangerous weapon; and that defendant inflicted great bodily injury on the victim. Defendant contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Court affirmed.