CA Unpub Decisions

Defendant and codefendant Christian Araniva were convicted in 2009 of two counts of attempted murder (§§ 664, 187, subd. (a); counts 1 and 2) and one count of shooting at an inhabited dwelling (§ 246; count 3). The jury found true the allegation that the attempted murders were willful, deliberate, and premeditated. The jury also found true the allegations that defendant personally used a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (b) and that a principal personally used a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivisions (b) and (e)(1). As to all counts, the jury found that the crimes were committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang pursuant to section 186.22, subdivision (b)(1)(C).

Cambridge is “a management and consulting firm that works with 38 post-acute and long-term healthcare facilities throughout California.” Cambridge colloquially refers to those separate facilities as “ ‘sister-facilities.’ ” Broadway, AG Seal Beach, LLC dba Seal Beach Health and Rehabilitation Center (Seal Beach), and KF Ontario, LLC dba Ontario Healthcare Center (Ontario) are all healthcare facilities that use Cambridge’s services. One of those services is “management placement.”
On March 19, 2018, Yee applied in writing, and was hired, for an “administrator-in-training” position for Seal Beach. Cambridge’s COO at the time hired Yee. According to Sanner, when Yee started working for Seal Beach, “the purpose was to train her to be an administrator so that she could take over as needed at another Cambridge-affiliated facility.” He declared “Cambridge regularly transfers management personnel between facilities to meet each facility’s needs.”

“Annice Waldrop [was] sitting in a car with [Charles] Keaton [(the victim) near] Westlake and Maryland Streets [o]n the afternoon of November 20, 2001. [The victim] wanted to purchase drugs before they left. []Aguilar approached the car and asked if they wanted to buy something. []Waldrop said, ‘“A nickel.”’ As soon as []Aguilar stepped toward the car with the cocaine base in his hand, police officers came out of the alley. []Aguilar dropped the cocaine base to the ground. [The victim] began eating crackers. The officers ordered []Aguilar to the sidewalk area [and] . . . told [him] to turn around and put his hands on his head. [¶]
“One of the officers approached the car . . . [and] asked [the victim] and []Waldrop what they were doing. They told the officer they were trying to sell []Aguilar a Walkman. The officer asked, ‘“What else are you guys doing?”’

This litigation concerns two former business partners and their limited liability company. Plaintiff and appellant Jasbir Singh and defendant and respondent Manmohan Singh Bhamra were equal managing partners of Three B Hotels, a Limited Liability Company (the LLC), which owned and operated a Holiday Inn Express in Enid, Oklahoma. Singh sued Bhamra in Oklahoma alleging Bhamra breached the LLC’s operating agreement in several ways, including by misappropriating funds. Singh sought to dissolve the LLC and distribute its assets to the parties. Singh dismissed the Oklahoma lawsuit with prejudice following a successful mediation and the sale of his interest in the LLC to Bhamra at an agreed-upon price.
Shortly after completing the sale, Singh initiated the present litigation against Bhamra and the LLC in the Los Angeles Superior Court, claiming the LLC owed him a portion of profits received during 2018 and 2019—the time period between the mediation and the completion of the sale.

On the morning of May 7, 2013, Ignacio Gonzales (Gonzales) was waiting outside Bowtie Connection, an auto body shop in the City of San Pedro. Gonzales was waiting for Vidaurry, who also worked at the body shop, to arrive and open the business.
At 8:20 a.m., Vidaurry drove up in a pick-up truck and parked on the street in front of the shop. The truck belonged to John Kennedy (Kennedy), Bowtie Connection’s owner, and he lent the truck to Vidaurry for a month while Vidaurry’s car was being repaired. Normally, Kennedy would use the truck to drive to the shop.
As Vidaurry was parking, Juan Sanchez (Sanchez) was leaving a market across the street from Bowtie Connection. After Vidaurry exited the truck, Gonzales and Sanchez saw a man wearing a hoodie-style sweatshirt, gloves, and a dust or dentist-style mask approach Vidaurry from behind and shoot him once in the head with a handgun. The shooter then fled the scene on foot, and Sanchez called 911.

In May 2021, Ellis fired a handgun toward an occupied residence. About a month earlier, he assaulted his ex-girlfriend.
Ellis pled no contest to discharge of a firearm at an inhabited dwelling and infliction of corporal injury on a dating partner, with a prior domestic violence conviction. His plea was open, with no specified term of imprisonment. In exchange for the plea, the prosecutor dismissed 10 additionally charged counts and numerous enhancement allegations.
At sentencing, the trial court found that Ellis was intoxicated at the time he committed the discharge of a firearm offense but that numerous aggravating factors—including the victims’ particular vulnerability and his numerous prior convictions—outweighed any factors in mitigation. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(a)-(b).)

After leaving their employment with Crush, plaintiffs sued Crush, a Crush manager named Nicholas Karavas, and Guillon. The operative first amended complaint, filed in January 2018, asserted claims for gender and pregnancy discrimination, sexual harassment by Karavas, unpaid wages, failure to provide meal breaks, and other Labor Code violations.
In November 2019, a jury found Crush liable for firing Lawler based on her pregnancy, and for failing as to all three plaintiffs to pay wages owed, to deduct only proper amounts from paychecks, and to provide meal breaks. The jury also found Crush and Karavas liable for sexual harassment against Berry and Butler, and for retaliating against Butler when she objected to the harassment.
In March 2020, the court entered a judgment awarding plaintiffs more than $305,000 against Crush, $125,000 against Karavas, and almost $135,000 in attorney fees and costs, plus interest.

On January 24, 2018, Kravchuk, then represented by counsel, filed a Judicial Council form complaint against Taylor alleging a claim for breach of written contract. She alleged that on or about March 9, 2017, she and Taylor entered into a written contract (the Agreement) involving the purchase and sale of 73 Montecito Vista Drive, Unit #1 in San Jose (the Property), which contract was attached to the complaint. Kravchuk alleged that on or after October 31, 2017, Taylor breached the contract by failing to sell the Property to her.
On July 27, 2020, Kravchuk, as a self-represented litigant, filed her second amended complaint, alleging seven causes of action and naming nine defendants: Taylor; Joyce Lee; Attorney James M. Ganion; law firm Collinsworth, Specht, Calkins & Giampaoli, LLP (CSCG); law firm Ulich Balmuth Fisher LLP (UBF); First American Financial Corporation (First American); Olivia Trelles; Tina Longo; and Beck. Taylor filed a demurrer to the second amended complaint.

On January 24, 2018, Kravchuk, then represented by counsel, filed a Judicial Council form complaint against Taylor alleging a claim for breach of written contract. She alleged that on or about March 9, 2017, she and Taylor entered into a written contract (the Agreement) involving the purchase and sale of 73 Montecito Vista Drive, Unit #1 in San Jose (the Property), which contract was attached to the complaint. Kravchuk alleged that on or after October 31, 2017, Taylor breached the contract by failing to sell the Property to her.
On July 27, 2020, Kravchuk, as a self-represented litigant, filed her second amended complaint, alleging seven causes of action and naming nine defendants: Taylor; Lee; Attorney James M. Ganion; law firm Collinsworth, Specht, Calkins & Giampaoli, LLP (CSCG); law firm Ulich Balmuth Fisher LLP (UBF); First American Financial Corporation (First American); Olivia Trelles; Tina Longo; and Taylor Beck. Taylor filed a demurrer to the second amended complaint.

Appellant Vinodkumarna Bonthu went out drinking with two friends and got behind the wheel of his car. When exiting U.S. Highway 101, Bonthu careened across a road into oncoming traffic and crashed head-on into another vehicle, killing two people and injuring three others. A jury convicted Bonthu of two counts of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and two counts of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) causing injury. The jury also found true several sentence enhancements based on the victims’ injuries. The trial court sentenced Bonthu to eight years and eight months in state prison.
On appeal, Bonthu claims the trial court erred by admitting evidence of an alcohol-content test performed by a hospital on his blood plasma and that his DUI convictions must be stricken as lesser included offenses of gross vehicular manslaughter.
For the reasons explained below, we affirm the judgment.

Jacob Aaron Cirt is charged in a felony complaint with possession of methamphetamine and sale or transportation of ecstasy. On July 2, 2021, Cirt was present in court when he was arraigned on the complaint in Department N3 before Judge Thomas J. Lo. According to the docket, Cirt was remanded to the custody of the Sheriff and bail set in the amount of $100,000. Cirt was ordered to be in court for the pretrial hearing set for July 23, 2021, and the preliminary hearing on July 29, 2021, both scheduled to take place in Department N12. Four days after Cirt was arraigned, a docket entry indicates a bail bond was posted and Cirt was released from custody.
The week before Cirt was scheduled to be back in court, the docket entry on July 14, 2021, states that Cirt’s case was transferred from Department N12 back to the calendar court in Department N3. On July 23, 2021, Judge Lo presided over Cirt’s pretrial hearing in Department N3.

In 2009, Chicanos Kicking Ass (CKA) and Family of Latin Kings (FOLKS) were rival street gangs. Reyes, moniker “Menace,” Martinez, moniker “Stalker,” and Freddie Guerrero, moniker “Cartoon” were members of CKA. On May 20, 2009, Reyes, Martinez, and Guerrero picked up Jose Linares in Martinez’s car and asked him if he wanted “‘to go to FOLKS.’” Linares understood that to mean they were going to “jump” a FOLKS gang member. Linares told them he was willing and that he had a gun stashed or hidden. Guerrero said he wanted to use the gun, but Reyes said he did, so Linares gave the gun, wrapped in a blue or black bandanna, to Reyes. Martinez was driving the car, Guerrero was in the front passenger seat, Reyes was in the right rear seat, and Linares was in the left rear seat.
Later, they saw Ricardo Cordova, who looked to them to be a FOLKS gang member. Linares said, “There is one.” Guerrero asked Cordova, “‘Where are you from?’”

On June 3, 2017, S.R. met her fiancée, J.G., outside a pub in Mission Viejo. Three men, including defendant, Castro-Lopez, later approached the couple. Castro Lopez said to S.R., “You don’t remember me? I’m Bouncer from Family Mob.” Shortly thereafter, Castro-Lopez and J.G. began to fight.
S.R. tried to intervene, but defendant pushed her to the ground. J.G. then fell to the ground; he was not moving. Castro-Lopez stomped on J.G.’s head and kicked him several times. Castro-Lopez then ran off with another man, and both men entered a vehicle driven by a third man. The vehicle was driven from the scene.
Paramedics responded and transported J.G. to the hospital. He sustained a skull fracture with a concussion, a nasal fracture, a tibial fracture, and multiple lacerations. J.G. spent several days in the hospital.

Valadez was convicted by a jury in 1990 of conspiracy to commit murder, two counts of first degree murder with a multiple murder special circumstance, and 11 counts of attempted murder. He was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. We previously affirmed those convictions in People v. Figueroa (Jun. 30, 1992, G010268, G010371 [nonpub. opn.]). Factual details concerning the crimes may be found in that opinion.
In July 2019, Valadez filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1170.95. After receiving briefing from the prosecution and Valadez’s counsel, the trial court denied the petition, finding Valadez had failed to make a prima facie case for relief. In denying the petition, the court concluded Valadez was not eligible for resentencing because the record of conviction demonstrated he was not convicted of felony murder or murder under a natural and probable consequence theory.