CA Unpub Decisions

HPS Mechanical, Inc. (HPS) entered into a contract with the City of San Diego (City) to serve as the prime contractor for City's South Mission Valley trunk sewer project (Project). HPS entered into a $394,700 subcontract (Subcontract) with Ayala Boring, Inc. (Ayala), an underground pipeline boring contractor, for Ayala to install casings and sewer lines under Interstate 8 (I-8) at two locations that were part of the Project. One location was near the interchange of I-8 and Interstate 15 (I-15), at which Ayala was to bore a 260-foot tunnel under I-8, install a 36-inch diameter casing, and then install a 24-inch customer furnished sewer pipe through that casing.

A jury found defendant Aaron Joseph Harris guilty of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)) and made a true finding on a great bodily injury causing paralysis enhancement (§ 12022.7, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced defendant to eight years in state prison.
Defendant contends a juror committed prejudicial misconduct and the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial on that ground. We conclude there was no juror misconduct and affirm the judgment.

Defendant Samantha Dee Gruwell pled no contest to unlawfully discharging a .22-caliber rifle in a grossly negligent manner. She was granted probation. On appeal, she challenges the condition of probation authorizing the warrantless search of “any data storage device, including cellular telephones and computers,” and requiring her to provide any passwords or unlock codes to allow for their inspection (special condition 65). Specifically, she argues that special condition 65 violates People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal.3d 481, and is constitutionally overbroad in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights. She further contends the condition requiring her to maintain a residence as approved by the probation officer (general condition 4) and the condition requiring her to obtain written permission from her probation officer before leaving the state (general condition 6) are both overbroad in violation of her constitutional right to travel.

Juliana D., the mother of five-year-old Alice A., appeals the juvenile court’s February 14, 2018 order pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 terminating her parental rights, identifying adoption as the permanent plan for Alice and designating Rita A., Alice’s paternal grandmother, as the prospective adoptive parent. Juliana contends the court erred in ruling she had failed to establish the parent-child relationship exception to termination of parental rights (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i)). We affirm.

Stephanie F. (Mother) appeals from the juvenile court’s jurisdictional findings and the dispositional order removing four-month-old Evelyn F. from her custody. She contends there was insufficient evidence to support the jurisdictional findings under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (b)(1) and (j), that her prior substance abuse placed Evelyn at substantial risk of serious physical harm. We agree and reverse the jurisdictional findings. However, because the dispositional order was superseded by the final juvenile custody order entered at the time the juvenile court terminated jurisdiction and Mother has not appealed from the dismissal order, Mother’s appeal from the dispositional order has been rendered moot.

Appellant S.M. appeals from the dispositional orders and jurisdictional findings of the juvenile court as to his minor sons J.M. (J.) and A.B. (A.). We reject his contention of insufficient evidence, but remand with directions to correct a clerical error in the minute orders. Subject to that correction, the orders and findings are affirmed.

Justino Estrada, previously convicted of first degree murder and two counts of attempted premeditated murder, appeals the sentence imposed at his resentencing hearing. Due to a change in state law, we again remand the matter for resentencing, at which time the other sentencing issues Estrada raises may be addressed.

Y.G. (Mother) and Omar S. (Father) appeal from the juvenile court’s jurisdictional findings that Father had sexually abused their nine-year-old daughter G.S. in 2012, and Mother failed to protect G.S. by allowing Father to reside in the home in violation of a juvenile court custody order, which permitted only monitored visits for Father. The parents contend the evidence is insufficient to support the jurisdictional findings under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (b)(1) and (d). Mother also asserts the juvenile court abused its discretion by ordering her to attend sexual abuse awareness counseling for a second time.

Defendants Central Korean Evangelical Church and Jang Kyun Park executed a deed of trust on real property that is the subject of litigation in order to secure the payment of unpaid attorney fees owed to their lawyer, Steven C. Kim. The trial court granted plaintiff New Life Oasis Church’s ex parte application to expunge the deed of trust. Defendants appeal from that post-judgment order. We dismiss the appeal because defendants are not aggrieved by the subject order, and therefore lack standing.

At a 12-month review hearing (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.21, subd. (f)), the juvenile court found substantial risk to then-nine-year-old S.J. if she were returned to the custody of her mother, Tamara J. The court found Tamara in partial compliance with her case plan and ordered additional reunification services for her. At the 18-month review hearing (§ 366.22), the juvenile court terminated Tamara’s reunification services and set a hearing for the selection and implementation of a permanent plan for S.J. (§ 366.26). Tamara filed an appeal from the findings and order made at the 12-month review hearing and a petition for extraordinary writ challenging the court’s rulings at the 18-month review hearing.

Robert Cyrus Cratty appeals from a judgment which sentences him to 40 years to life in state prison for criminal threats and injury to a spouse. Cratty contends the trial court erred when it denied his request to represent himself, admitted evidence of his prior convictions, and refused to strike his prior strikes at sentencing. We affirm the judgment.

Defendant Lachele Yvette Taylor cut Kevin Richardson with a knife during a dispute over a cup of coffee, inflicting serious injuries which required surgery and left him disabled. After the jury convicted her of mayhem and assault with a deadly weapon, Taylor appeals, asserting instructional error. We find no error and affirm.

In this business dispute, plaintiff and appellant John M. Wong, M.D., as Trustee for the John and Lily Y. Wong Family Trust, appeals from the judgment in favor of defendants and respondents Park Center Partnership (Partnership), California Forefront, Inc. (CFI), and Larry Sue. Plaintiff challenges two interlocutory orders: the final statement of decision on defendants’ cross-complaints for declaratory relief, and the order granting summary judgment on the operative third amended complaint.
The opening brief raises numerous issues, but because the record on the summary judgment motions is inadequate, we are unable to review that aspect of the case. As to the cross-complaints for declaratory relief, we find no basis for reversal. The judgment is affirmed.

Defendant Daeny Dayeong Sung filed a motion to set aside a default judgment arguing that he had been improperly served by publication. Specifically, Sung argued that the plaintiff, Ace Antenna Company, failed to make a diligent effort to serve him at his South Korea residence prior to seeking court authorization for service by publication. The trial court denied the motion. We affirm.