CA Unpub Decisions

Since 1979, plaintiff and appellant S. Emanuel Lin has owned a 10-acre property in Perris, California. Since 2014, defendant and respondent WRSP, LLC (WRSP), which is owned and operated by defendant and respondent Matthew Johnson (collectively, the WRSP defendants), has operated a private gun range on an adjacent property leased from the City of Perris (the City).
Lin, representing himself in propria persona, brought the lawsuit from which this appeal arises against the City and the WRSP defendants, asserting claims related to his property and the new gun range. During the course of the litigation, the trial court imposed sanctions against Lin payable to the WRSP defendants in the amount of $5,760 after Lin’s fourth unsuccessful request for leave to amend his complaint. In the present appeal, Lin asks that we reverse that sanctions award.

Once a conservatorship is established in California over a California resident, the conservator must obtain the probate court’s permission if they want to move the conservatee to another state. (Prob. Code, § 2352 [petition to establish residence of conservatee out of state]; unlabeled statutory citations refer to this code.) In such cases, the Probate Code presumes the conservatee’s California home is the “least restrictive appropriate residence” and requires the conservator to prove otherwise by a preponderance of the evidence. (§ 2352.5, subd. (a).)

Plaintiff and appellant Craya C. Caron, representing herself in propria persona, contends that she was injured not only by negligent dental care, but also by the acts or omissions of the representative of the estate of her oral surgeon and the attorneys retained to defend Caron’s malpractice lawsuit. The oral surgeon who treated Caron, Lonnie W. Tiner, DDS (Dr. Tiner), died before the filing of the lawsuit. Defendants and respondents include: (1) Dr. Tiner’s former business, Lonnie W. Tiner, DDS, APC, doing business as Hi-Desert Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Center (erroneously sued as Hi-Desert Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Center) (Hi-Desert); (2) the Estate of Lonnie W. Tiner (the Estate); (3) The Lonnie Walter Tiner and Patricia Lucille Tiner 2008 Family Trust (erroneously sued as Lonnie W. & Patricia L. Tiner Family Revocable Trust) (Family Trust); (4) Christopher K. Tiner, both individually and in his capacities as representative of the Estate and successor trustee of the Fa

A jury convicted Jonathan Kim of the first degree murder of Wileysha G., with the special circumstance of lying in wait (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 190.2, subd. (a)(15); count 1), and attempted murder of Samantha F. (§§ 664, 187, subd. (a); count 2). The jury found that Kim personally used a deadly or dangerous weapon while committing each offense (§§ 12022, subd. (b)(1), 1192.7, subd. (c)(23)) and that he personally inflicted great bodily injury upon Samantha (§§ 12022.7, subd. (a), 1192.7, subd. (c)(8)). In separate proceedings, Kim admitted one prior serious felony conviction (§667, subd. (a)), which is a strike prior. The court sentenced Kim to prison for 33 years plus life without the possibility of parole. At sentencing the court stated, "I've seen a lot of things in twenty-five years in this business. There are very few crimes I would characterize as just pure unadulterated evil, and this is one of them."

M.D. (Mother) appeals the juvenile court’s order that terminated her parental rights and selected adoption as the permanent plan. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) She contends the court erred when it found that the beneficial parent-child relationship exception to adoption did not apply. (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i).) We affirm.

The juvenile court sustained a petition against minor L. H. (appellant) for attempted robbery. On appeal, appellant argues that the prosecution presented insufficient evidence to establish: (1) that there was an attempted robbery, and (2) that appellant aided and abetted the attempted robbery. We affirm the juvenile court’s judgment.

Appellant Kevin Alvarado was convicted of one count of custodial possession of a weapon (Pen. Code, § 4502, subd. (a)) and sentenced to two years in state prison. On appeal, he asks that we review the sealed transcript containing the trial court’s review of police officer personnel files under Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess). After reviewing the transcript, we affirm.

Appellant Albert Florencio Chagollan was charged with and convicted of one count of driving or taking a vehicle without the consent of the owner (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)) and one count of misdemeanor possession of burglary tools (Pen. Code, § 466). He was sentenced as a second strike offender to four years in state prison. (See §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d).) On appeal, he asks that we review the sealed transcript containing the trial court’s review of police officer personnel files performed pursuant to Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess). Although it does not appear from the record that appellant joined in the Pitchess request made by his co-defendants, we have nonetheless reviewed the transcript. We conclude the court did not abuse its discretion in determining which complaint files were discoverable. We therefore affirm.

Willie Nunnery, a Three Strikes offender, appeals a postjudgment order resentencing him to two consecutive 25-year-to-life terms after he threatened to shoot three undercover police officers and was convicted by jury of two counts of making criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422) and possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 12021, subd. (a)(1)). We affirm.

A jury convicted appellant Daniel Burney of assaulting Francisco Buelna with a semiautomatic firearm (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (b)), and found true that he personally used a firearm in the crime (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)). The jury found not true allegations that he personally inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)) and that he committed the crime for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)). The jury acquitted him of the attempted premeditated murder of Buelna (§§ 664/187, subd. (a)), and deadlocked on the lesser charge of attempted voluntary manslaughter (§§ 664/192, subd. (a)). The court declared a mistrial on that count, and the count was dismissed before sentencing. The court sentenced appellant to 16 years in state prison: the midterm of six years on the conviction of assault with a semiautomatic firearm, plus the upper term of 10 years for firearm use.
Appellant’s sole contention on appeal is that the case must be remanded to the tr

Michael Angelo Jordan appeals a judgment and a victim restitution order in the amount of $16,271.04 following his no contest plea to carjacking. (Pen. Code, § 215, subd. (a).) He also appeals a post-judgment order denying his motion to withdraw his plea. We conclude, among other things, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in making the restitution order or in denying Jordan’s motion to withdraw his plea. We affirm.

Alonzo Banuelos appeals from a judgment sentencing him to five years in county jail following his conviction for possession of a billy club (Pen. Code, § 22210), and subsequent revocation of probation for that offense. The trial court found Banuelos had violated the conditions of his probation by failing to report to his probation officer; failing to enroll in drug treatment; failing to enroll in community work service; and being in possession of methamphetamine.
Banuelos argues we must reverse the court’s revocation order and imposition of sentence because there was insufficient evidence to support one of its probation violation findings: that he possessed methamphetamine. We affirm.

Maria R. appeals from the trial court’s order granting her former husband, Eddie D., joint legal custody of their then 10-year-old daughter, to begin upon expiration of a one-year domestic violence restraining order protecting Maria from Eddie. Maria contends the court abused its discretion in failing to apply the rebuttable presumption under Family Code section 3044 that it is not in a child’s best interest to award joint custody to a parent found to have committed domestic violence against the other parent. We agree with Maria’s contention and therefore reverse the portion of the custody order awarding joint legal custody and remand the matter for the trial court to apply the mandatory presumption in determining legal custody.

Bryan Medina Lopez was convicted in a court trial of discharging a firearm in a grossly negligent manner, a felony (Pen. Code, § 246.3, subd. (a); count 1); misdemeanor possession of a high capacity magazine (§ 32310, subd. (c); count 2); possession of an assault weapon (§ 30605, subd. (a); count 3); and carrying a loaded firearm, a misdemeanor (§ 25850, subd. (a); count 4).
At sentencing the court denied a defense motion to reduce counts 1 and 3 to misdemeanors in order to assist Lopez in avoiding the immigration consequences of felony firearm convictions. The court suspended the imposition of sentence and granted Lopez probation on various terms and conditions, including 365 days in custody. Lopez filed a timely notice of appeal.