Skip to content
Name: Harris v. Superior Court (San Joaquin County)
Case #: C083669
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 08/09/2017

A restitution order is a "significant adverse collateral consequence" within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 8.851(a)(1)(A), requiring the appointment of counsel for an indigent defendant on appeal in a misdemeanor case. Harris pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor charge of corporal injury on a spouse in exchange for probation. He was ordered to serve a 45-day jail sentence and to pay various fines and fees totaling $735. After a restitution hearing, the court modified Harris' probation and ordered him to pay restitution in the amount of $1,571.32. Harris then filed a notice of appeal, explaining that…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Guerra
Case #: F071164
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 11/21/2016

The requirement in Code of Civil Procedure section 77 that the appellate division of the superior court issue a brief statement of the reasons for its judgment, does not conflict with the Rule of Court that relieves the appellate division from having to issue written opinions. Defendant, who was charged with several driving while intoxicated misdemeanors, filed a motion to suppress evidence based on an improper detention. His motion was granted. The prosecution appealed to the appellate division of the superior court, which summarily reversed the trial court's ruling. Defendant's application for transfer to the Court of Appeal was granted.…

View Full Summary
Name: McMonagle v. Meyer
Case #: 12-15360
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 10/06/2015

California misdemeanant's conviction became final for AEDPA purposes at the close of the ninety-day period in which he could have sought a writ of certiorari to review the Court of Appeal's denial of a certificate of transfer. Defendant was convicted of misdemeanor driving under the influence offenses. He appealed to the appellate division of the superior court (Pen. Code, § 1466), which affirmed one of the convictions. His request that the appellate division certify his case to the Court of Appeal (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.1005) was denied. He then petitioned the Court of Appeal for transfer (Cal. Rules…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Lynall
Case #: H041737
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/29/2015

Court of Appeal has jurisdiction where a defendant was charged with a felony and the offense was ultimately reduced to a misdemeanor pursuant to Proposition 47 as part of plea negotiations. An information charged Lynall with felony possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377) and two misdemeanors. Shortly thereafter, Proposition 47 passed and the trial court amended the information to reflect that the methamphetamine possession charge "is now, by operation of law a misdemeanor." Lynall then pled guilty to that offense and the two other misdemeanors were dismissed. The court imposed a conditional sentence with Proposition 36…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Rivera
Case #: H041742
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/29/2015

Court of Appeal has jurisdiction over case in which appellant was charged with a felony offense and then later resentenced as a misdemeanant under Penal Code section 1170.18 (Prop. 47). Rivera pled no contest to felony possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350) and was placed on probation. During a probation violation proceeding, the court imposed a 16-month term on the felony possession offense. The court then granted Rivera's petition for resentencing under Proposition 47, designated his offense as a misdemeanor, and imposed a jail sentence. Rivera appealed and the Court of Appeal requested briefing…

View Full Summary
Name: Johnson v. Superior Court, Appellate Division
Case #: H039764
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/17/2014

Superior court appellate divisions violate Code of Civil Procedure section 77 by having two-judge panels, rather than three-judge panels, hear misdemeanor appeals. Johnson was convicted of a misdemeanor for disorderly conduct. His appeal was heard by a two-judge panel of the appellate division despite his objection that a three-judge panel was required under Code of Civil Procedure section 77. After the two-judge panel affirmed his conviction, Johnson sought a writ of mandate in the Court of Appeal to compel rehearing by a three-judge panel. Held: Writ issued. The plain language of section 77 requires that "three judges shall participate" in…

View Full Summary
Name: Lane v. Valverde
Case #: F061775
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/31/2012

In a Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) administrative hearing, once the Department has met its burden that the blood-alcohol test results are presumptively valid, the burden shifts to the licensee to establish that the tests are not valid. Appellant contested the suspension of his driving privilege, contending that the breathalyzer machine had not been tested for accuracy at the required intervals. At a DMV administrative license revocation hearing, the Department has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of evidence that the driver's blood alcohol level exceeded the legal limit. This can be done by introduction of breathalyzer evidence. Under…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Caravajal
Case #: C053507
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 12/17/2007

Absent a clear indication that a defendant's motion to withdraw the plea is based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the trial court's failure to hold a Marsden hearing cannot be addressed on appeal unless a certificate of probable cause has issued. Appellant pled no contest to receiving stolen property and possession of a controlled substance and admitted a prior "strike" conviction. At the sentencing hearing, he moved to withdraw his plea on the grounds that he had not understood various consequences of his plea. The trial court appointed alternate counsel to represent appellant to…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Nickerson
Case #: C045602
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/04/2005

The original complaint in this case charged a felony and two misdemeanor violations. After the preliminary hearing, the magistrate reduced the felony charge to a misdemeanor, and the case went to trial on two misdemeanor charges. After the jury convicted on one of the misdemeanors, appellant filed a notice of appeal in superior court. The clerk directed the appeal to the Court of Appeal. In this opinion, the appellate court transferred the case to the appellate division of the superior court pursuant to Government Code section 68915. Once a magistrate has reduced all charges from…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Kubby
Case #: C038631
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/11/2002
Subsequent History: Rev denied 6/19/02.

A misdemeanant (as well as a felon) who flees the state’s jurisdiction to escape his jail term forfeits his right to appellate review of the misdemeanor…

View Full Summary