CA Unpub Decisions

The juvenile court terminated the parental rights of defendants and appellants, W.P. (Mother) and R.N. (Father), as to G.N. (Minor), born in September 2016. On appeal, Mother contends the court erred in declining to apply the beneficial parent-child relationship exception to termination of parental rights. Father simply maintains that any reversal as to Mother should inure to his benefit as well. We affirm.

In this case, two juvenile court dependents, S.H. and D.H. (the girls), were removed from parental custody but were later returned to the physical custody of their father, defendant and appellant, D.H. (Father). At a review hearing on February 14, 2018, plaintiff and respondent, San Bernardino County Children and Family Services (SBCFS), recommended that the girls remain with Father and that the court terminate its jurisdiction, but the girls’ counsel asked the court to continue its jurisdiction.

Defendant Victor D. appeals from the judgment entered after the trial court found true the allegations of a delinquency petition filed under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, charging him with one count of vandalism resulting in damage worth $400 or more (Pen. Code, § 594, subds. (a), (b)(1)).
Victor contends that the record fails to disclose that the trial court was aware of, and exercised, its discretion to declare his offense either a misdemeanor or a felony, as required by Welfare and Institutions Code section 702 and the authority of In re Manzy W. (1997) 14 Cal.4th 1199 (Manzy W.). We conclude that the record discloses that the trial court declared the offense to be a felony, and that, given the presumption that the court properly exercised its discretion in the absence of an affirmative showing otherwise, the requirement of Welfare and Institutions Code section 702 was met in this case.

On April 30, 2017, D. R. went to the park with two other people. While there, Raymond Johnson confronted D. R. about reporting Danny Anakalea to police for stealing his truck. After D. R. admitted making the report, Johnson hit him in the face. D. R. turned to leave the park. He then heard a car engine start and saw a car drive toward him, nearly hitting him. Anakalea was driving and defendant Tonya Kaupang was inside the car. The car chased after D. R. Defendant and Anakalea got out of the car, caught up to D. R., and hit and kicked him. Sometime during the incident, D. R. was stabbed.

Defendant Dontae Demitre Reid pled no contest in November 2017 to assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury and assault with a deadly weapon and admitted he personally inflicted great bodily injury. He received a sentence of seven years in state prison. He did not seek a certificate of probable cause.
Counsel for defendant filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)
After reviewing the record, we asked the parties to address in supplemental briefing whether the trial court erred in sentencing. In response, defendant challenges his sentence by arguing he could not be convicted of violating both subdivision (a)(1) and (4) of Penal Code section 245. The People argue this contention fails because defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. We agree.

Appellant Keshawn Huff was convicted of pandering by encouraging (Pen. Code § 266i, subd. (a)(2)), an offense for which probation is prohibited by section 1203.065, subdivision (a). The trial court sentenced Huff to three years in prison and ordered him to pay attorney fees. Huff contends that (1) section 1203.065, subdivision (a)’s prohibition of probation for pandering as applied to him constitutes cruel and/or unusual punishment, and (2) the trial court erred in ordering payment of attorney fees without determining Huff’s ability to pay. We affirm the sentence, vacate the order to pay attorney fees, and remand for the trial court to conduct a noticed evidentiary hearing to determine Huff’s ability to pay prior to imposing attorney fees.

Mother appeals the juvenile court’s orders terminating jurisdiction and giving father full custody of their two children. Mother contends the juvenile court relied on the wrong statute when it terminated jurisdiction and abused its discretion when it ordered father to have full custody. We conclude mother forfeited her challenge because she failed to object to the court’s reliance on Welfare and Institutions Code section 364 when terminating jurisdiction. The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in awarding father full custody. We affirm on all grounds.

E.M. (Father) appeals from the July 13, 2017 order terminating his parental rights over his then 20-month-old daughter Kris M. He contends the juvenile court erred by terminating his reunification services because the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (the Department) failed to contact him to provide reunification services. We conclude there is substantial evidence to support the termination of Father’s reunification services. We affirm.

Patrick Marion Marshall appeals from a judgment convicting her of robbery and assault. She contends that (1) this matter should be remanded to allow the trial court to decide whether to strike firearm enhancements under Penal Code sections 12022.5 and 12022.53; and (2) the trial court committed an error in sentencing, which should be corrected on appeal by reducing her sentence. The People agree with the first contention and agree that the court committed a sentencing error, but argue that the proper remedy is to remand the matter for resentencing by the trial court. We conclude that the matter must be remanded to allow the trial court to (1) decide whether to exercise its discretion to strike the firearm enhancements, (2) correct the sentence for assault, and (3) resentence Marshall fully aware of its sentencing discretion. We therefore affirm the judgment of conviction, vacate the sentence, and remand for resentencing.

In 1989 Vivian Zagastume pleaded no contest to selling or transporting a controlled substance, a violation of Health and Safety Code section 11352. In 2016 she filed a motion to vacate her no contest plea, arguing that, when accepting her plea in 1989, the court failed to advise her of the immigration consequences of her plea. The trial court denied that motion, and we affirm.

Appellant Robert Julio Arnaud appeals the judgment of conviction after a jury found him guilty of the attempted and premeditated first-degree murder of Antonio Lizarraga. (Pen. Code, §§ 664, subd. (a), 187, subd. (a).) The jury also found true the allegations that the offense was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)), and that Arnaud personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury to the victim (§ 12022.53, subds. (b)-(d)).

A jury convicted Timotheuse J. Berry of assault with a deadly weapon and other crimes. Berry appeals, claiming his assault conviction is not supported by substantial evidence. We affirm.
On July 10, 2016, Flynn Helper and Brandon Bustillos hosted a party at their Los Angeles gallery. Helper and Bustillos went outside to check a disturbance and saw Berry at the recycling center across the street, screaming and acting strangely. They told Berry he should leave before they called the police, but Berry remained. Twice more during the party, Helper and Bustillos told Berry to leave. The confrontations grew heated. Then Berry disappeared.

A jury convicted Edward F. Osorio of the first degree murder of Matthew Martin and possession of a firearm by a felon. The jury also found true gang allegations as to both counts and firearm use allegations as to the murder count. After Osorio admitted prior convictions including a serious or violent felony conviction, the trial court sentenced him to state prison for a term of 80 years to life.

Fiona Bulanadi and her husband, Robert Bulanadi, appeal from a judgment of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained without leave to amend demurrers to the first amended complaint by Fiona’s employer, Southern California Permanente Medical Group (Permanente Medical Group), several entities involved in the administration of Fiona’s workers’ compensation claim, a claims adjuster, Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc., and Sedgwick’s employee, Fia Kyono. The trial court ruled the Workers’ Compensation Act barred all of the Bulanadis’ causes of action. We reverse the judgment and direct the trial court to overrule the demurrer to all causes of action other than fraud. As to that cause of action, we direct the trial court to sustain the demurrer with leave to amend to allow the Bulanadis to plead, if they can, fraud with the requisite specificity.