CA Unpub Decisions

Christine J. (mother) and Ryan W., Sr. (father) seek extraordinary writ relief from the juvenile court’s order setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing after it granted a section 388 petition filed by real party Department of Family and Children’s Services (the Department) and terminated their reunification services as to their six-year-old son, Ryan W., Jr. (Ryan). We conclude that the juvenile court must reconsider its decision because it prejudicially abused its discretion by applying the wrong standard of proof and by terminating father’s services under the disentitlement doctrine. We therefore grant relief.

Appellant Xavier Tavares Harris stands convicted of robbery and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. Penal Code section 186.22, subdivision (d) gang enhancements were found true as to both counts and a section 12022.53 firearm enhancement was found true as to the robbery count. Harris contends the evidence is insufficient to sustain the gang enhancement and the matter must be remanded for the trial court to exercise its discretion under section 12022.53, subdivision (h) to strike or dismiss the firearm enhancement. We affirm the gang enhancements and remand for the trial court to consider exercising its discretion under section 12022.53, subdivision (h).

Terrell Dennis Colbert appeals his jury-tried convictions for (1) attempted willful, deliberate, and premeditated murder of H.A. (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 187, subd. (a) (count 1)) and (2) possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1) (count 2).) With respect to count 1, the jury found that Colbert personally inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)) and found true various firearm enhancements (§ 12022.53, subds. (b), (c) & (d)). The court sentenced Colbert to 32 years to life in prison.

Michael C. (Father) appeals from a juvenile court order denying his Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 petition to grant reunification services for his minor son, J.C., after he previously waived services. J.C. supports reunification. Father is not pursuing reunification services for his daughter, R.C., and the minors' Mother, M.O., has not appealed; we address R.C. and Mother as needed to provide context for Father's appeal. We conclude the court abused its discretion by failing to consider J.C.'s changed circumstances, and we reverse.

A jury found Willie Tyrone Shipley guilty of evading an officer with reckless driving and driving when privilege is suspended or revoked. The court sentenced him to prison for five years. He now contends his conviction should be reversed for instructional error, claiming that the portion of the eyewitness identification jury instruction regarding witness certainty is incorrect. We affirm.

The Grande South at Santa Fe Place Homeowners Association (the Association) filed a petition under Civil Code section 4275 to reduce the percentage of votes necessary to amend its Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs). Roger D. Williams, a member of the Association acting in propria persona, challenged four of the 246 proposed amendments. Williams appeals the order granting the petition. He contends: (1) the Association misused the section 4275 procedure, (2) the order signed by the court did not conform to the court's oral pronouncement, and (3) the trial court committed legal error and thus abused its discretion because the Association failed to present any competent evidence regarding the reasonableness of the proposed amendments.

While returning from a trip to Reno with his wife, defendant Harris Maynard Riddle pulled their car over on Interstate 80 near Donner Lake and shot his wife through the leg while she sat in the passenger seat of their car. The court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of 10 years in state prison.

Among the terms and conditions, defendant was required to maintain his residence as approved by the probation officer and not to change his residence without prior written approval of the probation officer; defendant was also prohibited from leaving California without written permission from the probation officer. The trial court also ordered defendant to cooperate with any psychological or psychiatric testing or counseling suggested by the probation officer, and to authorize the release of any records from a psychologist, psychiatrist, counselor, or physician.
On appeal, defendant asserts these conditions are unconstitutionally overbroad. We agree only as to the change of residence condition, and remand with directions to modify. We otherwise affirm.

Victor R., Sr. (Father) appeals from the February 28, 2018 orders denying his Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 petition and terminating his parental rights over his daughter. Father argues that the juvenile court abused its discretion in denying his section 388 petition because it failed to consider his daughter’s bond with him and her family when determining her best interests. He challenges the termination of his parental rights, contending that he maintained regular visitation and contact with his daughter and shared a close relationship with her. He asserts the juvenile court abused its discretion in declining to find that the strength of his bond with his daughter and the benefits of continuing their relationship outweighed any benefit the child would derive from adoption. Finding no error, we affirm the orders.

Laevin Meikel Weatherspoon (appellant) was charged with the December 5, 2013 murder of Wanda Threadgill, with a further allegation that he used a deadly weapon, a kitchen knife, during the offense. (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 12022, subd. (b)(1)). Appellant denied all allegations. During the three and a half years between his arrest and the start of trial, appellant’s case suffered various delays and disruptions due to persistent questions about appellant’s mental competency to stand trial, and his misconduct both within and outside the courtroom.

Appellant Tonja V. is the maternal grandmother of Conner R. When Conner was born in 2007, he and his mother, Ashlee J., lived with appellant and her fiancé (now husband), Darrell V. After several years of litigation in family court, primary custody of Conner was given to his father, Thomas R. (Father). Father’s entitlement to custody was confirmed by a dependency court when it asserted jurisdiction over Conner, along with Ashlee’s two younger children by another father. Appellant and Darrell, together and separately, filed multiple motions and instituted several special proceedings seeking to have appellant and/or Darrell recognized as having parental status with respect to Conner or to compel Father to permit grandparent visitation.

Plaintiff Allyson Gonzalez, M.D., appeals from a judgment denying her petition for writ of administrative mandate pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5. Defendants terminated plaintiff from her medical staff position and revoked all of her clinical privileges. Plaintiff contends she was provided with inadequate notice. We affirm.

Respondent, the San Francisco Human Services Agency, has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal of J.Y. (Mother) from an April 2018 order of the juvenile court terminating her parental rights to Gavin G. under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. The motion states that counsel for Mother “has represented that appellant will not oppose this motion to dismiss,” and she has not done so.

U.V. (appellant) appeals from a juvenile court order declaring him a ward of the court and placing him on probation after he admitted to a charge of assault with intent to commit sodomy. Raising mostly constitutional claims of vagueness and overbreadth, he challenges nine probation conditions that, among other things: (1) prohibit him from possessing sexually arousing materials (condition number 24); (2) require him to submit to warrantless searches of his electronic devices and provide passwords (conditions numbers 11 and 13); (3) prohibit him from using internet communication programs (condition number 25); (4) require the release of information from therapy (conditions numbers 16 and 17); (5) require him to stay away from certain places (conditions numbers 22 and 27); and (6) require him to participate in substance abuse counseling as directed (condition number 18). We modify several probation conditions and remand others for modification by the juvenile court.