CA Unpub Decisions

Scott Yuen (Yuen) appeals from an order of dismissal after the trial court sustained without leave to amend a demurrer to the first amended complaint filed by defendant C&S Properties (C&S). In August of 2011, Yuen entered into a written lease agreement with C&S for commercial property located in Monterey Park, California (the Property). In an addendum to the lease, the parties agreed on an option for Yuen to purchase the Property if certain conditions were met. Yuen sued C&S, alleging causes of action for specific performance, reformation, declaratory judgment, and breach of contract based on his claim that he had properly exercised the option to purchase the property in October 2016 but C&S wrongfully refused to perform. The trial court sustained C&S’s demurrer without leave to amend, ruling, inter alia, Yuen “ha[d] not alleged any facts demonstrating that the conditions precedent to [Yuen’s] ability to purchase the [P]roperty were fulfilled.” We agree and affirm.

Defendant Tyjae Miller was convicted by a jury of one count of felony evading a peace officer while driving recklessly (Veh. Code, § 2800.2) and one count of misdemeanor driving without a license (id., § 12500). The trial court placed defendant on probation for five years.
Defendant filed a timely appeal from the judgment of conviction, contending the trial court erred in admitting his post-arrest statement to a California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer without proof that the officer had advised defendant of his Miranda rights. Defendant also contends the probation condition requiring him to live in a residence approved by his probation officer is constitutionally overbroad. We find defendant has forfeited his claim concerning his postarrest statement and we agree that the residential restriction condition must be stricken. We affirm the judgment in all other respects.

A jury convicted Aubrey Boone of first degree burglary and disobeying a court order. Boone appealed the judgment, and his appointed counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Boone then filed a supplemental brief in which he contends there was insufficient evidence supporting his convictions and the trial judge was disqualified. We affirm the judgment.

Plaintiff Joseph Poulose appeals from a judgment following a jury trial. Plaintiff sued defendants Ford Motor Company and Vista Ford in Woodland Hills, California (the dealership) for breach of the implied and express warranty under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Civ. Code , § 1790 et seq.) (Song-Beverly). On September 9, 2016, the jury returned a special verdict in favor of plaintiff in the amount of $5,000 restitution for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability (the implied warranty). Plaintiff contends the jury erred because it applied the wrong remedy for a breach of the implied warranty under Song-Beverly. Plaintiff also asserts the trial court erred by failing to answer a jury question during deliberation and not requiring the jury to re-deliberate to correct a purportedly insufficient verdict. We affirm.

Under California law, the trial judge in a criminal case must instruct the jury on all lesser-included offenses supported by substantial evidence. And under the federal constitution, a criminal defendant has the right to present a complete defense to the charged crime. That protection includes the right to instructions on the defense theory of the case. Here, defense counsel requested an instruction on the lesser-included offense of involuntary manslaughter—an unlawful killing without malice. Counsel conceded that defendant Tyshaun Vasquez administered a beating that killed Eddie Ray Smith, Jr., but argued defendant was not subjectively aware his actions could be deadly because Smith had a hidden spinal injury (metal rods had been placed in his neck in a prior surgery), the fatal injury was immediately adjacent to the metal rods, and the victim’s other injuries were relatively minor.

Plaintiff Rebecca Arias appeals from a judgment entered after the trial court granted defendant Lupe Kardoulias’s motion for summary judgment. We affirm.

A jury found Demitrius Travor Thomas guilty of premeditated murder, attempted murder, and negligent discharge of a firearm, and found true firearm allegations and gang enhancements. He appeals, arguing the trial court should have dismissed a juror and the evidence did not support the gang enhancements, and the matter should be remanded to allow the trial court to exercise its discretion to strike the firearm enhancements. We affirm the judgment of conviction and remand for resentencing.

This is an appeal from the juvenile court’s order terminating the parental rights of appellant X.F. (mother) to her biological child U.M. (minor). For the reasons stated herein, we reverse the order and remand the matter to the juvenile court for the limited purpose of ensuring compliance with the notice and inquiry provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (hereinafter, ICWA).

D.B. contends the juvenile court erred in sustaining allegations of a juvenile wardship petition that charged him with oral copulation by force (Pen. Code, § 288a, subd. (c)(2)(C)) and assault with intent to commit oral copulation (§ 220, subd. (a)(1)). He argues that the court erred in finding the offenses occurred in 2014 (when he was 14 years old) rather than in 2013 (when he was 13 years old), and that there was insufficient evidence to overcome the presumption that he did not understand the wrongfulness of his actions (§ 26). We will affirm.

On March 30, 2017, appellant filed a motion to vacate revocation of probation pursuant to Penal Code section 1473.7, subdivision (a)(1). In the motion, appellant raised the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel. He claims he was not properly advised by his trial counsel regarding the aggravated felony immigration consequences of his admission and sentence. Also, he argues his defense attorney was ignorant of the immigration consequences of his probation sentence, execution of sentence suspended (ESS); he should have requested a probation sentence, imposition of sentence suspended (ISS), as part of the deal. The trial court denied the motion on June 30, 2017. A timely appeal was filed on August 29, 2017. We affirm.

In this juvenile delinquency case, Omar S. was found to have committed two misdemeanors: public intoxication (Pen. Code, § 647, subd. (f)) and possession of alcohol by a minor (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 25662, subd. (a)). At disposition, he was placed on probation. Omar challenges the sufficiency of evidence underlying the jurisdictional findings and contends the juvenile court imposed an unreasonable and unconstitutionally overbroad probation condition. We strike the probation condition and remand for modification. In all other respects, we affirm.

In August of 2016, N.M. called 911 and reported that she had just been hit, bitten, and choked by defendant Jessie Turner at her home. Police officers responded to the scene, where one officer conducted a brief interview with N.M. that was captured on his body camera. The officer then followed N.M.’s ambulance to the hospital and conducted a further interview with her while she received medical treatment. Turner was subsequently charged with various crimes arising out of the incident, including felony domestic violence. N.M. did not testify at trial, but the trial court admitted the body camera footage of N.M.’s interview at the scene and permitted the officer to testify regarding his further interview with her at the hospital. A jury found Turner guilty of certain of the charges. On appeal, Turner contends that the admission of the body camera footage and N.M.’s statements at the hospital was error. We affirm.

Cross-complainants Charles P. Sweeney and his company Axxis Financial, LLC appeal from orders quashing service of summons for lack of personal jurisdiction as to cross-defendants D-Rock Technology Holdings, LLC and Wendall Brown. Sweeney and Axxis claim specific jurisdiction exists over D-Rock Holdings and Brown because their cross-claims arise from actions by D-Rock Holdings and Brown “purposefully directed at” California. We affirm as to D-Rock Holdings and reverse as to Brown.

The probate dispute that forms the basis for this appeal began over a decade ago with the death of Sammie Leroy Morris, Sr. (Senior) on September 3, 2007. Senior was survived by three sons: Gerard Morris (Gerard), Sammie Leroy Morris, Jr. (Junior), and Maynard Morris. Approximately three weeks after Senior’s death, Junior died on September 25, 2007. Junior’s wife, Shirley Anne Morris (Shirley), was appointed personal representative of Junior’s estate in July 2009 and subsequently filed a petition to determine title with respect to certain assets held by Senior immediately prior to his death in which she believed Junior’s estate had an interest.